Arete Scholars Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272494520
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Suwanee, GA, USA
Phone
4046972649
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,423,910
Expenses
$6,068,212
Assets
$12,408,193
Liabilities
$178,946

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Arthur Dupre (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Arthur Dupre (President): $346,059 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To assist low-income students in reaching their highest potential through educational opportunity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Arete Scholars Fund invested more than $5 million in 1,247 scholars across Georgia not merely to pay tuition, but to open a door that changes a familys trajectory. Every Arete Scholar is recognized as a young person of potential whose gifts deserve a school environment designed to develop them. In FY 2025, Arete expanded its scholar development programming through four integrated pillarsAcademic Support, Leadership Formation, College & Career Pathways, and Sustaining Successproviding tutoring, mentorship, and post-secondary guidance alongside the scholarship itself. The development of area funds deepened partnerships with regional employers to create internship and workforce pathways for graduating scholars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.04; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 91.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $346K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.