Blackburn College
Legal name: Blackburn University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 370661491
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Carlinville, IL, USA
- Phone
- 2178543231
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $20,420,086
- Expenses
- $24,576,967
- Assets
- $80,701,281
- Liabilities
- $11,087,759
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LARRY LEE (PRESIDENT)
- DEANA ROGERS (VICE PRESIDENT OF ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE)
- SARAH KOPLINSKI (VICE PRESIDENT OF INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT)
- JUSTIN NORWOOD (VICE PRESIDENT OF INCLUSIVE ENROLLMENT)
- LOGAN ELLIOTT (VICE PRESIDENT OF DIVERSE & EQUITABLE STUDENT LIFE)
Highest reported compensation
- LAURA WIEDLOCHER (PROVOST): $167,225 total reported compensation
- DEANA ROGERS (VICE PRESIDENT OF ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE): $146,562 total reported compensation
- JUSTIN NORWOOD (VICE PRESIDENT OF INCLUSIVE ENROLLMENT): $142,820 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Blackburn College provides access and delivers transformative educational experiences for students from all economic and social backgrounds.
What it reported doing in 2024
464 students served during fall semester 2024; 430 students served during spring semester 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% 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 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 79.3%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th 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: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- 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: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -20.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.28; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 79.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $167K · 25 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.1M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.