Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 721173156
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baton Rouge, LA, US
- Phone
- 877-242-3509
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $31,169,298
- Expenses
- $32,156,677
- Assets
- $62,120,324
- Liabilities
- $25,118,768
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
39 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tina Holland PhD (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- David Hochheiser (Board Member/VP Contracting Payor Relations): $579,728 total reported compensation
- Kenneth Wester (Former officer): $378,706 total reported compensation
- Tina Holland PhD (President & CEO): $360,286 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 Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady University is to educate and form Franciscan servant leaders of all faiths.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide for the operation of a private not-for-profit university in order to ensure the community and state of Louisiana maintain an adequate supply of healthcare professionals. The number of full-time equivalent students benefitted are 905 during the spring, 463 during the summer, and 919 during the fall.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 81% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 - 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: 85
- Accountability: 87
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th 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: -3.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.93; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 28 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $580K · 39 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 34 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.