Marian Court College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042325504
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Swampscott, MA, USA
Phone
7815956768
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,634,154
Expenses
$3,163,925
Assets
$1,041,523
Liabilities
$547,738

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR DENISE HAMMON (PRESIDENT)
  • MARIBETH FORBES (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR DENISE HAMMON (PRESIDENT): $173,777 total reported compensation
  • MARIBETH FORBES (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS): $130,416 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Marian court college, a catholic institution sponsored by the sisters of mercy, welcomes people of all beliefs into a nurturing academic environment. Currently offering the associate in science degree, marian court provides quality programs to equip students for lifelong learning and to instill the spirit of inquiry. Founded on the mercy core values of compassion, integrity, justice, and service, the college challenges and empowers its students to become contributing members of society, sharing their gifts with mercy and justice.

What it reported doing in 2013

Offered college courses and scholarships to students pursuing associates degrees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% 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 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.3%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.3% of revenue deployed · 52.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.