Davenport University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 381945965
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Grand Rapids, MI, US
- Phone
- 1.866.925.3884
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $125,921,834
- Expenses
- $128,282,948
- Assets
- $140,638,059
- Liabilities
- $68,685,432
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICHARD PAPPAS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID VENEKLASE (FORMER INTERIM TREAS/SEC/EVP FINANCE AND CFO): $1,089,454 total reported compensation
- RICHARD PAPPAS (PRESIDENT): $800,983 total reported compensation
- SCOTT EPSTEIN (EVP FOR QUALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS): $411,317 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Davenport University offers flexible, career-focused degree programs that help you earn the education, skills, and real-world experience you need to rise above the rest.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provide education to approximately 5,000 students at locations throughout Michigan, including over 3,000 sections of courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels of post-secondary education in business, health, and technology.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% 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 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.8%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 97%; rating input score 97; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 31st 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: -1.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 94.8% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $110M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 20 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.3M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 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: 11 filed money-flow records
- 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.
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: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.