Arkansas Baptist College
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 710298658
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Little Rock, AR, USA
- Phone
- 501-420-1200
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,218,427
- Expenses
- $14,582,735
- Assets
- $28,792,764
- Liabilities
- $3,779,489
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
People named in this filing
- DARYL BASSETT (TRUSTEE)
- SARAH CANNON (TRUSTEE)
- RICHARD MAYS SR ESQ (CHAIR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Arkansas Baptist College prepares students for a life of service grounded in academic scholarship, the liberal arts tradition, social responsibility, Christian Development and preparation for employment in a global community. Founded in 1884 as the Minister's Institute, our primary objective was to raise the educational level of the African American ministry while valuing the teaching principles of Jesus Christ. Today, our mission extends to serve as a comprehensive liberal arts institution preparing students from all backgrounds for success. “Our programs combine rigorous academics with spiritual development, preparing students for success in their careers and personal lives.”.
What it reported doing in 2024
Abc recruits and enrolls most students that require assistance and additional time to complete their college degree. The college's enrollment was xxxx. Many of its students are first generation college entrants. Many of the students family income is low and most students come from Arkansas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 73.6%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.97; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 73.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.