Coalition for College Cost Savings

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870788565
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Versailles, KY, USA
Phone
8593214810
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,513,112
Expenses
$2,291,983
Assets
$1,471,758
Liabilities
$442,395

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LYEN CREWS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES FOWLKES (VP OF TECHNOLOGY): $310,612 total reported compensation
  • LYEN CREWS (PRESIDENT): $274,846 total reported compensation
  • ANITA GIRELLI (VP OF PROGRAMS AND COMMUNI): $128,049 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The coalition for college cost savings (the coalition) was conceived as a catalyst for the first comprehensive and collaborative purchasing effort focused exclusively on independent, private higher education. The coalition's goals are to leverage the collective buying power of private colleges to reduce operating costs, improve the efficiency of internal procedures and ultimately lower the cost of delivering education.

What it reported doing in 2025

The coalition was conceived as a catalyst for the first comprehensive and collaborative purchasing effort focused exclusively on independent, private higher education. The coalition's goals are to leverage the collective buying power of private colleges to reduce operating costs, improve the efficiency of internal procedures and ultimately lower the cost of delivering education.the average private, independent college or university is often underserved in the purchasing marketplace because its total consumption of supplies, equipment and services, as a single institution, is not sufficiently large to result in consistently competitive pricing. By combining a single institution's purchase volume with hundreds of similar institutions throughout the country, the created market strength of private colleges enables competitive leverage rivaled only by the largest of corporations.specifically, our goals are to:1. Provide access to cost saving contracts to higher education institutions regardless of size.2. Leverage the collective buying power of private colleges to negotiate contracts that deliver better pricing on products and services.3. Investigate and vet organizations that can deliver innovative products or services that increase operation efficiency.4. Serve as a procurement resource for higher education administration. The coalition has 32 member organizations in 30 states that collectively serve nearly 1,000 private colleges and over 900 private colleges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 68% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 8.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.6% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $311K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.