Blue Ridge Community College Educational Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541328809
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Weyers Cave, VA, USA
Phone
5404532211
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,042,331
Expenses
$1,697,734
Assets
$21,778,165
Liabilities
$49,307

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY KIGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY KIGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $144,825 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 brcc educational foundation builds community relationships and secures resources to strengthen the programs and services of blue ridge community college. The college's impact on the community is profound, providing the pathway to success for students and local employers. Current state and local appropriations provide funding for only the basic operations of the college and are not sufficient to keep pace with the challenges of meeting brcc's diverse student needs and addressing workforce development services and programs. To meet the community's increasing needs for programs, services, facilities, and scholarships, private funds are necessary. Funds raised by the brcc educational foundation represent the difference between adequacy, as provided by traditional sources of funding, and excellence, that only private investment can provide.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the 2024-25 academic year, the foundation provided 141 named scholarship awards totaling $550,404 to 396 deserving students. The majority of these awards were based on financial need. While a degree at blue ridge community college appears affordable, especially compared to four-year institutions, it is beyond the means of many students and families in our community. These scholarships were provided to students in both credit and non-credit programs. Among them were awards for participants in blue ridge promise, a bridge program for high school seniors interested in attending brcc after graduation. Others were awards to high school seniors providing a pathway to enroll in workforce courses and receive credentials in careers such as certified clinical medical assisting, heavy equipment operation, phlebotomy, and welding. Every one of these scholarships gave students the opportunity to achieve their educational and career goals, thus improving the quality of life for their families and the communities in which they live and work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 93% of its reported program spending out as 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 90.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.83; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.5% of revenue deployed · 90.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.