Granite Edvance
Legal name: Granite Edvance Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 020368776
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Concord, NH, USA
- Phone
- 603-225-6612
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $61,204,622
- Expenses
- $59,200,848
- Assets
- $912,774,268
- Liabilities
- $585,082,056
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christiana Thornton (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Christiana Thornton (President & CEO): $553,840 total reported compensation
- Scott Rogers (VP & CFO): $323,375 total reported compensation
- John Flanders (VP & Chief Strategy/Lending Officer): $262,577 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to support New Hampshire students and families in navigating their education and career pathways. Our mission at Granite Edvance is to support New Hampshire students and families in navigating their education and career pathways. Granite Edvance (formerly the New Hampshire Higher Education Assistance Foundation, or the NHHEAF Network) has been helping New Hampshire families plan and pay for higher education for over 60 years. We’re a capable and trusted provider of student loan products. And we provide students, families, and schools with expertise and support on all parts of college and career planning. We are laser-focused on one thing – helping **you,** the students and families of New Hampshire.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Corporation was organized for the charitable and educational purpose of providing low-cost financial assistance primarily to eligible students attending college in New Hampshire or residents attending college out of state.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.6%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 94.2%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.3%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.42; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 84.6% of revenue deployed · 94.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $554K · 26 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.8M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.