Flagler College

Legal name: Flagler College Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591157081
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-T 2023, Form 990-N 2008
Location
St. Augustine, FL, USA
Phone
904-829-6481
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$106,606,962
Expenses
$102,914,284
Assets
$264,488,568
Liabilities
$82,871,760

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN DELANEY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN DELANEY (PRESIDENT): $968,557 total reported compensation
  • KRISTY C MYERS (VP OF INSTITUTIONAL ADVANC): $332,004 total reported compensation
  • DEBORAH LYNN THOMPSON (VP OF ENROLLMENT MANAGEMEN): $293,373 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Flagler College's mission is to provide an outstanding education that fosters ethical values and personal growth, preparing students for meaningful lives and careers.

What it reported doing in 2023

The college provides a high quality education to students in a small, historic, campus environment. Serving over 2,300 undergraduate students, flagler offers 56 major and minor programs in various fields of study, with a 15 to 1 student to faculty ratio. The college serves an additional 400 students through its evening public administration program in st. Augustine, and degree-completion programs at the tallahassee campus. Scholarships are awarded to eligible students based on financial need, as well as academic and athletic achievement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% 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 79% for direct work, and 21% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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; 77th 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; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.57; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $83.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $969K · 37 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $24.8M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 13 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • 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.