Bennett College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560532296
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3365172100
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,451,445
Expenses
$15,863,622
Assets
$45,987,969
Liabilities
$9,676,889

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUZANNE E WALSH (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURA MCLEAN (VICE PRESIDENT, ACADEMIC AFFAIRS)
  • ELIZABETH WAUGH (CFO AND VICE PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS)
  • YVETTE WIMBERLY (ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT, ENROLLMENT)
  • PHANALPHIE RHUE (VICE PRESIDENT, INSTITUTIO)
  • SHEMRICO ROMAN STANLEY (VICE PRESIDENT, ENROLLEMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUZANNE E WALSH (PRESIDENT): $320,726 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH WAUGH (CFO AND VICE PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS): $165,721 total reported compensation
  • PHANALPHIE RHUE (VICE PRESIDENT, INSTITUTIO): $152,533 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 offer women an education conducive to excellence in scholarly pursuits, preparation for leadership roles in the workplace, society, and the world, and life-long learning in a technologically advanced, complex global society.

What it reported doing in 2024

To sustain a learning community in which students can prepare academically, socially, and spiritually for leadership in a complex, diverse, and rapidly changing world. A total of 353 students were enrolled during the fall and spring semesters.

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 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 48.3%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th 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: -9.8%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.9; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 48.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $4M reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.