Lawrence Technological University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381369604
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Southfield, MI, USA
Phone
18002255588
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,537,631
Expenses
$102,301,315
Assets
$204,901,725
Liabilities
$78,870,623

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAREK SOBH (PRESIDENT)
  • Nabil Grace (VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIPS)
  • DANIEL RADOMSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ACCELERATOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TAREK SOBH (PRESIDENT): $791,903 total reported compensation
  • Nabil Grace (VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIPS): $430,631 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL RADOMSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ACCELERATOR): $398,190 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To develop leaders through innovative and agile programs embracing theory and practice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Higher Education : Student Activities - Academic associations, student government, recreational and athletic programs. Participation in various associations were used by 3,108 students. These activities are important components for the University's primary exempt purposes of providing educational services. These activities include library, copier, transcripts, fines and other various services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 47th 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: -11.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $74.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $792K · 31 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.8M reported
  • Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.