Aquinas College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381367080
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
(616) 632-2893
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
University or Technological Institute
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,580,396
Expenses
$61,128,137
Assets
$126,721,704
Liabilities
$40,654,618

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALICIA CORDOBA (PRESIDENT (LEFT 04/25))
  • Sr Maureen Geary OP (President (Start 04/25))
  • TIMOTHY STAFFORD (Vice President for Finance)
  • Brian Matzke (Vice President for Enrollment Management)
  • SCOTT TRAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADVANCEMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALICIA CORDOBA (PRESIDENT (LEFT 04/25)): $332,533 total reported compensation
  • David Cunningham (Director, NetVUE): $180,498 total reported compensation
  • Brian Divita (Associate Professor Business Administration): $165,854 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Aquinas College, an inclusive educational community rooted in the Catholic and Dominican tradition, provides a liberal arts education with a global perspective, emphasizes career preparation focused on leadership and service to others, and fosters a commitment to lifelong learning dedicated to the pursuit of truth and the common good.

What it reported doing in 2024

Aquinas college serves undergraduate and graduate students. The college strives to provide a liberal arts education with a global perspective, emphasizing career preparation focused on leadership and service to others, rooted in the catholic dominican tradition.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 83% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 89.8% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $51.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $333K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.6M reported
  • Consistency: 51 of 52 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.