Highland Community College Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481067637
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Highland, KS, USA
Phone
7854423236
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,238,347
Expenses
$564,142
Assets
$7,612,234
Liabilities
$76,449

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM GORMLEY WHITE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GENE BAUER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TED COLLINS (SECRETARY/TR)
  • PAUL CRAWFORD (ALUMNI LIASO)

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

The highland community college foundation was established in 1987 to assist the college in performing its mission; to receive and administer private gifts, bequests, and donations to benefit highland's students; and to enhance the quality of teaching and learning at the college. Gifts to the foundation support programs and activities not funded through performing its mission; to receive and administer private gifts, bequests, and donations to benefit highland's students; and to enhance the quality of teaching and learning at the college. Gifts to the foundation support programs and activities not funded through traditional sources. At the same time, foundation provides assistance to donors through a comprehensive program of tax-wise gift alternatives through planned giving.

What it reported doing in 2024

Received, managed, and distributed gifts in order to build and maintain academics and support programs at highland community college. Also distributed assets to the college. 66,325 in scholarships were awarded, and 224,386 was paid to third party vendors for improvement projects around the campus.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.4%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 51.5%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $37.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd 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: 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 54.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.49; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.4% of revenue deployed · 51.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $291K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.