Emory & Henry University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540505892
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Emory, VA, USA
Phone
2769446800
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,452,058
Expenses
$81,284,787
Assets
$274,468,737
Liabilities
$81,878,800

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

Leadership & pay

39 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JOHN W WELLS (FORMER PRESIDENT)
  • DR A LOUISE FINCHER (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT PARKER (VICE PRESIDENT FOR INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR JOHN W WELLS (FORMER PRESIDENT): $218,166 total reported compensation
  • DR A LOUISE FINCHER (PRESIDENT): $214,532 total reported compensation
  • LAURIE FERGUSON (DEAN, SCHOOL OF NURSING): $184,513 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Emory & henry university is a learning community in pursuit of excellence, engaging a diverse group of well-qualified men and women in educational experiences in which students confront historical and contemporary ideas and issues, and develop the ability to think critically about all areas of human experience. These educational experiences lead to lives of service, productive careers and global citizenship. E&h strives to provide the highest quality education combining tradition and innovation as it transforms lives and creates positive social change in our region, our nation, and our world.

What it reported doing in 2024

E&h university provided formal instruction and related academic support for 1,190 full-time equivalent undergraduate and graduate students toward the fulfillment of bachelor of science and bachelor of art degrees in a variety of fields of study, as well as graduate degrees in physical therapy, occupational therapy, and physician assistance. The university's undergraduate academic program is shaped by goals to develop the students' intellectual abilities, to strengthen their ability to think critically about ethical decisions and responsible actions, to evoke a commitment to serve others, and to nurture their curiosity through lifelong learning. Student financial aid was provided to most undergraduate students through a variety of scholarships and grants, supporting the pursuit of degrees. Formal classroom instruction was provided by faculty members in small classroom settings. To enhance the academic experience for students, services were provided through the library, the powell resource center(for academc counseling, personal counseling, skill development, testing resources, tutoring, workshops, and academic accommodations for students with documented disabilities), the ampersand center (project learning and career counseling), and the office of the academic dean. Writing labs and quantitative labs were available to students on an ongoing basis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% 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.
  • 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: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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: 97%; rating input score 97; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.38; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.8% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 33 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $70.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $218K · 39 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $14.6M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, 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: 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.