Ball State University Alumni Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 270458828
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Muncie, IN, USA
- Phone
- 8884464278
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alumni Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $649,727
- Expenses
- $546,969
- Assets
- $1,669,252
- Liabilities
- $85,915
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jean Kramer Crosby (Foundation President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jean Kramer Crosby (Foundation President): $340,338 total reported compensation
- Stephen Wachtmann (Ex-officio, CFO BSUF & TREASURER BSUAA): $221,650 total reported compensation
- Beth Alexander (Assistant Secretary): $126,912 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 ball state university alumni association exists to foster and fully realize the ideals and mission of the university. The alumni association encourages loyalty, participation, and support of the university by informing alumni of the achievements and needs of their alma mater. The alumni association advances the university throughout the world and unites all alumni in closer bonds of education, fellowship, tradition, and mutual assistance.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization awards annual scholarships to various undergraduate groups in recognition of their participation in alumni related activities, homecoming organization participation and other student-alumni related activities. Scholarships are also provided for children and grandchildren of alumni and for graduate and doctorate students based on academic achievement. Its mission in awarding these scholarships is to foster ongoing participation in activities of the university.
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 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 15.8%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.05; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $519K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $340K · 34 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.