Mount Marty University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460283336
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Yankton, SD, USA
- Phone
- 605-668-1545
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $37,870,208
- Expenses
- $36,461,412
- Assets
- $79,181,510
- Liabilities
- $25,259,752
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR MARCUS LONG (PRESIDENT)
- DR WILLIAM MILLER (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DR MARCUS LONG (PRESIDENT): $320,630 total reported compensation
- DR MARK BROWN (PROF. - BIOTECHNOLOGY): $301,552 total reported compensation
- ANDREA ROBERTS (DIR. AND ASST. PROF. - ANETHESIA): $301,227 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mount Marty University, an academic community in the Catholic Benedictine liberal arts tradition, prepares students for a contemporary world of work, service to the human community and personal growth.
What it reported doing in 2024
Providing educational services to approximately 1,284 students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 85% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% 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: 81
- Accountability: 97
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th 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: Pass
- 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; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: 3.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $33.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 27 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 12 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: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.