Georgia College & State University Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
586043972
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Milledgeville, GA, USA
Phone
4784455400
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,069,282
Expenses
$3,930,715
Assets
$71,792,342
Liabilities
$7,749,341

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHY COX (TRUSTEE, PRESIDENT (GCSU))
  • B SETH WALKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VP UNIVERSITY ADV, GCSU)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHY COX (TRUSTEE, PRESIDENT (GCSU)): $355,351 total reported compensation
  • B SETH WALKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VP UNIVERSITY ADV, GCSU): $234,366 total reported compensation
  • LAURIE K TAYLOR (AVP ADVANCEMENT SERVICES, GCSU): $107,293 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 foundation promotes and supports the mission and vision of Georgia college & state university by acquiring and administering resources, and by advocating for the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

Granting of scholarships and educational support activities to Georgia college & state university to further the educational experience of the students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 38th 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: 51.3%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.26; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $355K · 35 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.