Bay Path University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042103865
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Longmeadow, MA, USA
- Phone
- 4135651219
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $103,964,615
- Expenses
- $84,420,066
- Assets
- $165,249,628
- Liabilities
- $30,349,787
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
33 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sandra Doran (President)
- Frank Rojas (VICE PRESIDENT OF ENROLLMENT)
Highest reported compensation
- Sandra Doran (President): $576,348 total reported compensation
- Michael Giampietro (Senior VP Finance & Admin Svcs): $326,383 total reported compensation
- Frank Rojas (VICE PRESIDENT OF ENROLLMENT): $286,509 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bay path university is a distinctive, progressive, professionally focused undergraduate and graduate university serving all learners. The university enrolls traditional undergraduate women at its longmeadow campus; women and men in bay path online, which offers undergraduate online degrees; and men and women in masters and doctoral programs. On july 1, 2024, cambridge college inc. Contributed certain of its education business assets to the university expanding its reach to more than 4,500 students.
What it reported doing in 2024
Auxiliary enterprises provide services for the convenience of the students, faculty, and staff. This includes dining services, student housing, the bookstore, and other miscellaneous services. The university served approximately 3,400 students, including approximately 300 resident students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.8%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.96; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $65.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $576K · 33 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.1M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.