Chapman University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951643992
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Orange, CA, USA
Phone
(714) 744-7677
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$757,765,974
Expenses
$689,739,963
Assets
$2,373,586,868
Liabilities
$525,822,485

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

Leadership & pay

81 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIELE STRUPPA (PRESIDENT/EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEE)
  • HELEN NORRIS (VICE PRESIDENT & CIO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIELE STRUPPA (PRESIDENT/EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEE): $1,897,658 total reported compensation
  • HAROLD HEWITT JR (EXEC VP & COO (THRU 4/23/25)): $1,060,378 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW PARLOW (EXEC VP AND CHIEF ADVANCEMENT): $983,995 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Many of Chapman’s corporate partners are excited to support students who work on GCI projects that align with their company's mission. In addition to meeting with teams to contribute to projects, partners often attend GCI career networking events, where they help students explore the range of professional options available following graduation. These companies may also provide internship opportunities to students, with a wide range of industries being represented: Aerospace.

What it reported doing in 2024

Auxiliary enterprisesstudents can choose to attend a variety of educational, spiritual, cultural, service and social events. Because of chapman's size, students are not limited to one or two aspects of campus life but are able to engage in a wide array of opportunities. Chapman university is proud to offer several housing options for students, including five traditional residence halls and six apartment-style residence facilities. We strive to ensure that our residence halls and apartments are comfortable and safe living and learning environments. The chapman living and learning environment creates an engaging campus climate and provides meaningful experiences that facilitate the following learning outcomes:- a healthy sense of self: students will develop an honest understanding and appreciation of themselves and an ability to make individual choices that promote their health and well-being.- a framework of personal ethics and values: students will develop a framework of consistent ethics and values that guides their daily lives.- an ability to apply critical thought: students will make effective decisions grounded in careful, objective analysis of information, experiences and ideas.- an ability to develop and sustain meaningful relationships: students will develop skills to establish and sustain healthy, meaningful interpersonal relationships.- a commitment to citizenship: students will understand their role and responsibilities within local and global communities and commit to becoming an engaged member.- a pursuit of lifelong learning: students will develop an intellectual curiosity and desire for continual learning both within and beyond formal education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% 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 65% for direct work, and 35% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 99
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 54th 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%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.44; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 80.2% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 63 of 64 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $610.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.9M · 81 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $14.5M reported
  • Consistency: 46 of 46 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 13 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 45 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 32 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.