Converse University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570314380
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Spartanburg, SC, US
Phone
864.596.9000
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,688,632
Expenses
$47,603,490
Assets
$175,006,278
Liabilities
$29,233,366

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR BOONE HOPKINS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR BOONE HOPKINS (PRESIDENT): $313,667 total reported compensation
  • KRISTIN LACEY (VP OPERATIONS & CFO): $199,717 total reported compensation
  • KESHIA JACKSON GILLIAM (ASSOCIATE VP OF HUMAN RESOURCES): $141,153 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Converse empowers students to become transformative leaders who see clearly, decide wisely, and act justly.

What it reported doing in 2024

Converse university is a residential university, meaning on-campus living is a valuable experience where in and out of class learning merge. From historic charm to modern ease, converse's residence halls offer diverse options to suit the needs and preferences of today's students. Living in a residence hall community offers students opportunities to learn about themselves and others. Each residence hall has student development staff, programming and facilities available to help each student. Converse's residential communities are more than just places to hang out when students aren't in class. They are where students feel the most at home and develop relationships with peers in a community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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 75% for direct work, and 25% 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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th 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: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.68; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $40.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 35 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5M reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 12 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: 7 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.