Haigazian University Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
980233371
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beirut, LE
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,231,781
Expenses
$8,442,407
Assets
$7,515,325
Liabilities
$3,060,398

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REV DR PAUL HAIDOSTIAN (President)

People named in this filing

  • REV DR PAUL HAIDOSTIAN (President)
  • DR HASMIG BARAN EDD (Trustee)
  • JOHN SAGHERIAN (Trustee)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Haigazian university is a liberal arts institution of higher learning which operates on the american model of higher education using english as the language of instruction. Its purpose is to provide quality education in a christian environment where academic freedom and the search and dissemination of truth are predominant. It seeks to prepare students both for leadership positions and as professionals to serve in the armenian and non-armenian lebanese communities. The ethnic and geographic identity of the university demands the preservation and promotion of its armenian and middle eastern heritage within the global context. Haigazian university is an instrumentality of the witness of the armenian evangelical church. Haigazian university is co-educational and open to academically qualified students regardless of race, nationality or creed.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provides higher education to approximately 660 full-time students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 42% for direct work, and 58% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 56.4%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.5% of revenue deployed · 56.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 21 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.