Culver-Stockton College
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 430610813
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Canton, MO, US
- Phone
- 573-288-6000
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $36,716,313
- Expenses
- $36,824,491
- Assets
- $77,741,371
- Liabilities
- $10,503,979
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
37 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LAUREN SCHELLENBERGER (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- LAUREN SCHELLENBERGER (PRESIDENT): $257,056 total reported compensation
- KIMBERLY GAITHER (VP FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS): $166,425 total reported compensation
- JULIE STRAUS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $144,113 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 mission of Culver-Stockton College is to prepare students of promise for a dynamic world through our distinctive experiential curriculum within a supportive learning community founded upon the best values of faith and the human spirit.
What it reported doing in 2024
Auxiliary enterprises for the benefit of students (residence halls, dining hall, etc.): approximately 650 students
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 86% 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 54% for direct work, and 46% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $29.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 37 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- 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.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.