Cambridge College Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510163080
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6178730449
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$384,361
Expenses
$983,244
Assets
$8,335,603
Liabilities
$3,171,427

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENNIS MADIGAN (PRESIDENT & VP OF FINANCE & ADMIN.)
  • STEPHEN E HEALEY (FORMER INTERIM PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH C JACKSON (FORMER PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN E HEALEY (FORMER INTERIM PRESIDENT): $402,946 total reported compensation
  • DEBORAH C JACKSON (FORMER PRESIDENT): $335,372 total reported compensation
  • LAURETTA D SIGGERS (FORMER VP OF HR & TALENT DEV.): $247,362 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 provide academically excellent, time-efficient and cost-effective higher education for a diverse population of working adults for whom those opportunities may have been limited or denied.

What it reported doing in 2024

On july 1, 2024, cambridge college contributed substantially all of its assets to bpu acquisition, llc d/b/a cambridge college at bay path university, a Massachusetts limited liability company and public charity that is wholly controlled by the Massachusetts nonprofit corporation that owns and operates bay path university. As a result of this transaction, cambridge college ceased doing business and is in the process of dissolving the corporate legal entity and winding up its affairs. The transaction is subject to final regulatory approvals of the department of education and Massachusetts attorney general, among others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

REVIEW - 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: 3
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 67
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 2.8%; rating input score 3
  • Program expense ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 5
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -155.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.48; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 250.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.8% of revenue deployed · 5.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $53K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $403K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.