Embry-riddle Aeronautical University Asia Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 980681431
IRS 990 coverage: 2016–2024
Forms available: Form 990 2024
Location: Daytona Beach, FL, USA
Phone: 3863238078
Rating: 48
Verdict: MIXED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $1,420,317
Expenses: $1,077,445
Assets: $2,111,702
Liabilities: $920,256

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

RANDALL B HOWARD (BOARD MEMBER): $713,980 total reported compensation
JOHN WATRET (CHAIRPERSON): $586,000 total reported compensation
CHARLES SEVASTOS (BOARD MEMBER): $354,533 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 embry-riddle aeronautical university, asia ltd (erau asia) is to extend embry-riddle aeronautical university, inc.'s (erau) opportunity for delivering higher education and research in aviation and aerospace in key countries of the asia pacific region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Erau asia provides flexible undergraduate and graduate programs, offered on both a part-time and full-time basis, serving both pre-employment students and working professionals.

Operating model

Revenue model: Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model: Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 40
Transparency & Controls: 63
Accountability: 48
Sustainability: 59
Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 40.2%; rating input score 40
Program expense ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 53
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Major donor itemization: Limited
Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: 24.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.96; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 40.2% of revenue deployed · 52.8% of spending went to programs
Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $569K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $714K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $106K reported
Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 2 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.

Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.