Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Pennsylvania

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251666617
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Harrisburg, PA, USA
Phone
7172328649
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,595,089
Expenses
$2,593,029
Assets
$5,294,639
Liabilities
$1,318,644

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS P FOLEY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS P FOLEY (PRESIDENT): $421,263 total reported compensation
  • NICHOLE DUFFY (VP GVT RELAT): $214,386 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY C ALEXANDER (VP FIN & ADM): $199,346 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the association of independent colleges and universities of Pennsylvania (aicup) is to serve and promote independent colleges and universities as vital, distinctive components of the higher education community in Pennsylvania and the nation, to preserve and promote the strengths and distinctive characteristics of non-proit higher education institutions and to increase the financial means available to these institutions, to further the availability of education opportunity for residents of Pennsylvania and others who seek education or training at independent colleges and universities in Pennsylvania, to enhance the business and educational partnership in pa and increase the effectiveness of donations in advancing higher education, to encourage and solicit corporate, business, and other giving to the independent colleges and universities in Pennsylvania, to further by study, research, publication, and teaching an understanding of the role and needs of higher education, to

What it reported doing in 2024

The association serves its members in many ways. It disseminated information and provided various services both to its members and to the public. The association also sponsored various programs through royalty agreements with independent vendors to help colleges and universities realize savings through economies of scale. Such programs include a telecommunications program, bond facilities program, employment benefits program, energy procurement and energy management program, student loan program, software procurement program, tuition installment program, purchase card program, envionmental compliance, student health insurance, cyber security initiative, and a multiple employer retirement plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 80.3%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.04; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 68.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $421K · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.