LeMoyne-Owen College
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 620475690
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Memphis, TN, USA
- Phone
- (901) 435-1000
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,150,552
- Expenses
- $27,326,893
- Assets
- $44,916,722
- Liabilities
- $9,380,819
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mr Christopher Davis (President)
- Ms Joyce McGhee (Vice President of Administration Finance, CFO)
- Dr Lisa J Lang (Provost Vice President for Academic Affairs)
- Ms Kimberly Bailey (Vice President of Information Technology, CIO)
- Ms Amy Davis (Vice President, Human Resources, CHRO)
- LaMar-Octavious Scott (Vice President, Student Affairs)
Highest reported compensation
- Mr Christopher Davis (President): $264,004 total reported compensation
- Ms Joyce McGhee (Vice President of Administration Finance, CFO): $180,000 total reported compensation
- Dr Lisa J Lang (Provost Vice President for Academic Affairs): $167,092 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
LeMoyne-Owen College provides a close-knit, supportive environment where students are empowered to lead, innovate, and make an impact.
What it reported doing in 2024
Auxiliary enterprises support the colleges mission of providing quality educational opportunities. These services include, but are not limited to, food service, campus housing, campus post office, vending, campus store and athletics.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 97
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 59%; rating input score 59
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- 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: 95%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: -42.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 59% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $16.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $264K · 30 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 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: 11 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.