Georgia College & State University Alumni Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237194778
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milledgeville, GA, USA
Phone
4784455400
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$705,206
Expenses
$628,006
Assets
$11,597,611
Liabilities
$10,928

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLE HOOD (PRESIDENT; CHAIR - EXEC COM)
  • BRANDIE MOCK (VICE PRESIDENT; CHAIR-DIRECTORSHIP COMMITTEE)
  • ZACH MULLINS (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT; MEMBER-AT-LARGE)
  • BLAIR S WALKER (GCSU VP OF UNI ADV; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EX-OFFICIO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BLAIR S WALKER (GCSU VP OF UNI ADV; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EX-OFFICIO): $234,366 total reported compensation
  • LAURIE K TAYLOR (GCSU AVP OF ADV SVCS; EX-OFFICIO): $107,293 total reported compensation
  • WILL SMITH GCSU ACCOUNTANT (MEMBER-AT-LARGE): $87,025 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 association shall empower alumni to forge enduring connections with their alma mater, each other, and the wider community. The association shall enrich the lives of alumni through a spectrum of valuable services, including dynamic networking platforms, exclusive programs, and engaging gcsu-oriented events, while championing the university's goals. The association shall seek to mobilize resources, foster support and involvement, and passionately advocate for gcsu's continued success.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Georgia college and state university alumni association provides funding to Georgia college and state university to enable the college to award scholarships to attending students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Fail
    • 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: 10.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.47; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 34 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $553K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $234K · 36 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.