Clark Atlanta University

Legal name: Clark Atlanta University Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581825259
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Phone
(404) 880-8000
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$208,620,809
Expenses
$188,133,067
Assets
$397,241,326
Liabilities
$29,737,889

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

Leadership & pay

54 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charlene Gilbert (Provost and Senior Vice President, Academic Affairs)
  • Cherise Peters (Vice President for Enrollment Management and Student Life)
  • Cynthia Gomes (Vice President, Business and Auxiliary Services)
  • Eli Phillips (Executive Vice President and COO)
  • George French Jr (President)
  • Kimberlee Parker (Vice President for Compliance)

Highest reported compensation

  • George French Jr (President): $601,099 total reported compensation
  • Eli Phillips (Executive Vice President and COO): $471,544 total reported compensation
  • Christopher Lee (Senior Vice President and CFO): $420,114 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Clark Atlanta University is a leader in scholarship, innovation, and service, preparing students to discover their personal ambitions and professional purpose through rigorous academic exploration and faculty mentorship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Instruction: clark atlanta university (cau), formed in 1988 as a result of the consolidation of two independent historically black institutions - atlanta university (1865) and clark college (1869), is a united methodist church related, private, coeducational, residential, and comprehensive urban institution. The university awards bachelors, masters, specialist and doctoral degrees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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; 77th 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: 9.8%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.1% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $147.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $601K · 54 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $11.5M reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 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: 26 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.