Laurel University Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560650621
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
High Point, NC, USA
Phone
3368873000
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,984,709
Expenses
$2,285,507
Assets
$3,190,964
Liabilities
$718,430

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR STEVE CONDON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR STEVE CONDON (PRESIDENT): $113,171 total reported compensation
  • EMILY LITTLEFIELD CPA (VP OF FINANCE AND INSTRUCTION): $1,353 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of laurel university is to be a distinctive biblical leader in higher education. The graduates are proven leaders in large and small corporations, academic institutions, businesses and the ministry. The institution's size and intentionally rigorous curriculum guarantees a unique and profound set of learnings outcomes upon graduation.

What it reported doing in 2014

Laurel university is a private, interdenominational university committed to providing quality educational instruction for undergraduate and graduate degrees in ministry and management to approximately 146 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 60.6%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd 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; 73rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.5% of revenue deployed · 60.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 17 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $166K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.