Metropolitan Bridgeport Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
060646936
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Bridgeport, CT, USA
Phone
2035764690
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,024
Expenses
$187,473
Assets
$2,546,213
Liabilities
$3,249,899

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOAHANNES VAN DER GIESSEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOAHANNES VAN DER GIESSEN (PRESIDENT): $68,330 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Metropolitan bridgeport inc. Ceased providing educational services (see schedule o)prior to the sale of its assets, metropolitan bridgeport inc (fka university of bridgeport) (the university) offered career oriented undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees and programs for people seeking personal and professional growth. The university promoted academic excellence, personal responsibility, and commitment to service. Distinctive curricula in an international, culturally diverse, supportive learning environment prepared graduates for life and leadership in an increasingly interconnected world. The university is independent and non-sectarian.

What it reported doing in 2024

On may 21, 2021, the university of bridgeport sold substantially all of its assets to goodwin university inc. (goodwin), a Connecticut nonstock corporation, the new university of bridgeport, inc. (new ub), a Connecticut nonstock corporation and subsidiary of goodwin university, and sound education, llc, (paier college) a Connecticut limited liability company formed by paier college. (see schedule o)in order to avoid the confusion that the new university of bridgeport and the university of bridgeport might cause, and to emphasize that the new university of bridgeport would continue to offer most of the programs that the university of bridgeport had offered, the university of bridgeport changed its name to metropolitan bridgeport inc. On june 28, 2021.the ongoing mission of metropolitan bridgeport inc. Consists of the conduct of wind down operations that are the responsibility of old ub which were not assumed by goodwin, inclusive of phasing out certain retirement plans, settling certain liabilities, processing and paying unemployment benefits incurred by employees of old ub, ensuring compliance with certain tax filings, phasing out of remaining perkins loans, transferring contracts that goodwin will maintain, and transferring net assets with donor restrictions to goodwin.prior to the sale, the organization was an independent and nonsectarian international academic institution.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 33.9%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -545.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.58; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.28; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 33.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $64K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.