Seminary of the Southwest

Legal name: Episcopal Theological Seminary of the Southwest

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741238448
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Austin, TX, United States
Phone
512-472-4133
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Graduate, Professional Schools (Separate Entities)
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,640,042
Expenses
$6,197,834
Assets
$49,055,678
Liabilities
$7,253,280

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Very Rev Cynthia Kittredge (Current Dean/Pr): $203,446 total reported compensation
  • Frederick L Clement (Exec. VP): $145,628 total reported compensation
  • Very Rev Douglas B Travis (Prev Dean/Pres): $118,409 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission rooted in the reconciling ministry of Christ: form people for vocations of ministry, service, and healing. Rooted in the reconciling ministry of Christ, the mission of Seminary of the Southwest is to form people for vocations of ministry, service, and healing. Vision The insight and creativity with which Seminary of the Southwest engages the Christian tradition with the reality of the contemporary world makes it a leader among institutions of higher learning, both within and beyond The Episcopal Church. Sustained by innovative teaching and research, Southwest forms servant leaders who minister in a diverse culture with confidence and humility. The seminary has the financial and spiritual capacity to discern and develop new programs to advance God’s mission of healing and reconciliation.

What it reported doing in 2013

Theological Education Development - As a graduate school academic institution, the Seminary serves the mission of the Church by preparation of students for competent Christian Ministry. Program services include instruction expenses, library expenses, and auxiliary services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.5%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 59.8%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 18.9%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.91; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 52.5% of revenue deployed · 59.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.