Lesley University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042103589
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6173498500
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$99,354,092
Expenses
$112,690,131
Assets
$426,764,056
Liabilities
$130,210,395

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANET L STEINMAYER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANET L STEINMAYER (PRESIDENT): $698,282 total reported compensation
  • DEANNA YAMEEN (INTERIM PROVOST): $333,945 total reported compensation
  • MARY-JANE MACLAUGHLIN (CHIEF HR OFFICER): $326,441 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lesley university engages students in transformative education through active learning, scholarly research, diverse forms of artistic expression, and the integration of rigorous academics with practical, professional experience, leading to meaningful careers and continuing lifelong learning. Lesley prepares socially responsible graduates with the knowledge, skills, understanding and ethical judgment to be catalysts shaping a more just, humane, and sustainable world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Expenses related to instructing full time and part time students: the university is home to a number of important centers that conduct research, help shape public policy, and provide continuing education and professional development opportunities across a wide range of disciplines.the institution serves approximately 3,700 students, including undergraduate, graduate, and continuing education populations. It offers more than 50 academic programs and maintains an alumni network exceeding 84,000 individuals, with its campus located in cambridge.lesley university academics:*undergraduate study:-courses + programs in cambridge -online courses + programs-college of art and design (la+d)-liberal arts & business programs-education programs-mental health & well-being programs*graduate study: -courses + programs in cambridge and Massachusetts-online courses + programs- education programs- mental health & well-being programs- art programs*unique program formats *centers*continuing education + professional development *threshold non-degree program*accreditation: -new england commission of higher education-national association of schools of art and design-the baccalaureate business management program is accredited by the accreditation council for business schools & programs (acbsp).-the bachelor of social work (bsw) is accredited by the council on social work education (cswe).-the master of social work (msw) is accredited by the council on social work education (cswe).-the clinical mental health counseling: art therapy is accredited by the commission on accreditation of allied health education programs (caahep) upon the recommendation of the accreditation council for art therapy education (acate).-the clinical mental health counseling: art therapy program is approved by the american art therapy association.-the clinical mental health counseling: dance therapy program is approved by the american dance therapy association.-the clinical mental health counseling: drama therapy program is accredited by the north american drama therapy association.-the clinical mental health counseling: music therapy program is approved by the american music therapy association

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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.
  • 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.79; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $85.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $698K · 35 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $25.6M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.