Lake Erie College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340733165
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Painesville, Ohio, US
Phone
440.375.7000
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,260,402
Expenses
$46,300,219
Assets
$70,385,247
Liabilities
$40,353,055

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

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER SCHULLER (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER KINNAIRD (VICE PRESIDENT/PROVOST)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER SCHULLER (PRESIDENT): $250,470 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER KINNAIRD (VICE PRESIDENT/PROVOST): $223,656 total reported compensation
  • ROGER CHRISTIANSON (CFO): $158,575 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lake Erie College has been helping students launch their futures since 1856.

What it reported doing in 2024

The college provided instructional courses to its 1,103 undergraduate and 308 graduate students in addition to providing continuing education and professional development courses and workshops. It also provided student services for admissions, registration, advising, athletic programs and academic support including library resources, a learning center, animal care and support, and faculty and curriculum development. As necessary auxiliary operations, the college operated residence halls, dining services, a bookstore, and the equestrian center, which includes a horse arena, classrooms and boarding facilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% 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 54% for direct work, and 46% for 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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; 66th 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: -7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 95.2% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 37 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.4M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • 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: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.