Midland University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470376551
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fremont, NE, US
Phone
(800) 642-8382
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,520,611
Expenses
$64,545,793
Assets
$73,589,111
Liabilities
$20,889,633

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JODY HORNER (PRESIDENT (THRU 5/2025))
  • KRISTINA CAMMARANO (VICE PRESIDENT OF STUDENT AFFAIRS)
  • DR ALY WILLIAMS (PRESIDENT (BEGAN 4/2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • JODY HORNER (PRESIDENT (THRU 5/2025)): $296,516 total reported compensation
  • JEFF JAMROG (HEAD FOOTBALL COACH): $181,978 total reported compensation
  • JAMIE SIMPSON (CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER): $169,287 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Midland University is a private liberal arts university in Fremont, Nebraska, dedicated to providing a transformative education that prepares students for meaningful careers and lives of purpose.

What it reported doing in 2024

Instruction: midland university offers multiple degrees including bachelors degrees in business, education and nursing, as well as a masters in business administration and education. The 2024-2025 enrollment was 205 nontraditional undergraduate students, 1,104 traditional students in the fall, 322 non-traditional and 1,120 traditional students in the spring, and 249 graduate students in the fall and 230 graduate students in the spring.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% 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 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th 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: 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 39th 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: -0%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $57.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $297K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.2M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.