Georgia Piedmont Technical College Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581746961
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Clarkston, GA, USA
Phone
4042979522
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$607,274
Expenses
$585,451
Assets
$675,283
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Sonya Hunte-Vandroff (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Sonya Hunte-Vandroff (Executive Director): $69,600 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 the Georgia Piedmont Technical College Foundation is to (1) Promote the cause of postsecondary technical and adult education (2) to help support educational opportunities for the constituents of Georgia Piedmont Technical College and (3) to acquire and administer funds

What it reported doing in 2024

The Georgia Piedmont Technical College Foundation provided support to students of Georgia Piedmont Technical College to promote their technical education and expand their educational opportunities. This includes scholarships and awards to recognize and reward outstanding students, and grants to provide assistance in times of difficulty in order to continue their endeavors to fulfill their education dreams.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $441K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.