Missouri Valley College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
440545286
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Marshall, MO, USA
Phone
6608314183
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,365,959
Expenses
$54,683,148
Assets
$53,661,932
Liabilities
$23,551,174

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH PARISI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSEPH PARISI (PRESIDENT): $336,933 total reported compensation
  • DAN GRIGG (SR VP DEVELOPMENT): $134,060 total reported compensation
  • TANO MATEU (CHIEF INFORMATION SECURITY OFFICER): $127,916 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Guiding students to succeed through personal instruction and intellectual inquiry.

What it reported doing in 2024

Student service activities - student involvement is vital to the overall college experience. Mvc has 25+ clubs and student organizations where students have the opportunity to enrich their leadership skills, social life and personal growth. Mvc offers a number of services to help meet students' needs through the student health center, which normally services 700+ students per semester, a counseling center and a fitness center. In addition, mvc offers a variety of intramural events, with 600+ participants, and a variety of other activities including shuttle service to local businesses and regional airports. In addition, the student success center provides resources to support the students' academic success, personal growth, and career development. A beginning student orientation program is required for all incoming students. This orientation is a fifteen-week program centered on civility, development of critical thinking skills, team building, communications skills, acceptance, and the importance of continued education in the global mindset.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% 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 49% for direct work, and 51% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.2% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $49.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $337K · 30 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.6M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • 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: 7 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.

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: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.