Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411921743
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8282587879
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$378,164
Expenses
$372,851
Assets
$328,958
Liabilities
$38,625

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Cole Woodcox (Exiting Executive Director)
  • Jeanine Went (Executive Director (started 2-3-25))
  • Dr Tuajuanda Jordan (President)
  • Dr James Birge (President-Elect)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Cole Woodcox (Exiting Executive Director): $183,554 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 Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges advances the aims of its member institutions and drives awareness of the value of high-quality, public liberal arts education in a student-centered, residential environment. It collaborates with major national higher education organizations like the Association of American Colleges and Universities, and the Council of Undergraduate Research.

What it reported doing in 2024

To help member institutions share resources, polices, models, protocols, messaging, ideas, and approaches to common issues, COPLAC hosted regular meetings for communities of practice. During these peer-to-peer conversations, representatives from member institutions discussed strategies for how their campuses addressed numerous higher education issues. Communities of practice that met included deans of arts and science, chief academic officers, marketing and communication offices; study abroad/away lifelong learning centers; and centers for teaching and learning.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $291K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $184K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.