Lindsey Wilson University
Legal name: Lindsey Wilson University Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 610444763
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Columbia, KY, USA
- Phone
- 270-384-2126
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $83,885,911
- Expenses
- $80,381,876
- Assets
- $134,313,545
- Liabilities
- $23,887,712
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
43 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR WILLIAM T LUCKEY JR (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DR WILLIAM T LUCKEY JR (PRESIDENT): $892,589 total reported compensation
- PHILIP YOHO (VP FOR SPECIAL PROGRAMS): $262,655 total reported compensation
- MARK COLEMAN (VP FOR ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE): $229,511 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Lindsey Wilson University is a private, four-year liberal arts college affiliated with the United Methodist Church. The university is committed to providing a living-learning environment within an atmosphere of active caring and Christian concern where every student, every day, learns and grows and feels like a real human being.
What it reported doing in 2024
Higher education: 4,147 full and part time students enrolled in undergraduate and graduate classes: 1,752 degrees bestowed in the academic year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% 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 61% for direct work, and 39% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.4%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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: 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: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 82.4% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 31 of 34 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $69.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $893K · 43 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 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: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.