College of Our Lady of the Elms
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042225850
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Chicopee, MA, USA
- Phone
- 4135942761
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $45,510,118
- Expenses
- $49,407,962
- Assets
- $81,892,976
- Liabilities
- $19,035,948
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
44 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- HARRY DUMAY (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- HARRY DUMAY (PRESIDENT): $443,764 total reported compensation
- AMANDA GARCIA (DIRECTOR, MBA PROGRAM): $196,907 total reported compensation
- JULIE BECK (DEAN OF NURSING): $172,888 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 college of our lady of the elms, a catholic college, educates a diverse group of students in a supportive, vibrant learning community. Combining a liberal arts education with professional studies, elms college empowers students to effect positive changes in the community and in the world. Affirming the founding tradition of the sisters of st. Joseph, elms college challenges students to embrace change without compromising principle, to respond creatively to the demands of their chosen careers, and to advocate for people in need. Elms college is a community rooted in faith, educated in mind, compassionate in heart, and responsive to civic and social obligations.
What it reported doing in 2024
The college is devoted to educating students in a supported, vibrant learning community and has adapted to changing times by developing innovative programs designed to prepare them for leadership in a wide variety of fields. Educational programs are offered in seven different sessions. During the 2024/2025 school year, we served 1,633 full and part time students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% 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 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.4%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 23rd 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: -8.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.66; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.4% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 31 of 34 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $37.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $444K · 44 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.2M reported
- Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
- Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.