Bethany College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480543734
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Lindsborg, KS, USA
Phone
800.826.2281 x 8113
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,328,682
Expenses
$30,561,483
Assets
$38,086,418
Liabilities
$36,703,247

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA CRAWLEY (PRESIDENT - AS OF 05/25)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN ECKMAN (INTERIM PRES.- 01/24 - 04/25): $225,000 total reported compensation
  • HALEY WESLEY (VP OF ENROLLMENT): $86,096 total reported compensation
  • ADAM PRYOR (PROVOST): $85,851 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Bethany College is a private liberal arts college affiliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, dedicated to preparing students for lives of faith, learning, and service.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and instruction - bethany college, established by swedish lutheran immigrants in 1881, is a college of the evangelical lutheran church in america (ecla) located in lindsborg, Kansas. Bethany is a small, private four-year institution which provides education in over 42 academic discipline majors and programs of study which lead to three degrees. The college provides approximately 600 students with an educational opportunity that emphasizes the mission, which is to educate, develop, and challenge individuals to reach for truth and excellence as they lead lives of faith, learning, and service.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% 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 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $39.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 5.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.25; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $26.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $225K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.