Associated Students of Stanford University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941279777
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Stanford, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6507251459
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,933,087
- Expenses
- $2,181,592
- Assets
- $38,076,252
- Liabilities
- $12,092,217
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAS ESPINOSA (CEO)
- DIEGO KAGURABADZA (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JAS ESPINOSA (CEO): $120,152 total reported compensation
- JOHAN SOTELO (BOARD MEMBER): $21,360 total reported compensation
- LINH VO (board member): $10,502 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 provide various services to the students, to the university campus community and provide an educational experience for the students it employs. The organization works to represent the interests, needs and perspectives of stanford students at every level of decision making within the university. The organization advocates on behalf of stanford students on issues such as cost of living, diversity, student life and student activities space. Each year the assu strives to innovative new projects and create new services that will improve the quality of student life offered at stanford. It also hold funds on behalf of student groups and provides administrative, banking and accounting services over the funds for student groups. These groups in turn provide the majority of cultural, political, recreational and religious programming for the entire campus.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Organization receives student activity fees from Stanford University which are collected from undergraduate and graduate students as a separate component of their students account bill. Student activity fees are charged and collected at the start of the fall, winter, and spring quarters. The fee amount for each quarter is approved through a budgeting process, including the administration of ASSU, by the student body, the ASSU governing bodies, and the Vice Provost for Student Affairs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.3%; rating input score 40
- Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 9th 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: 25.6%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.45; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.3% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 20 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $186K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other securities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.