Nassau Community College Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112533314
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Garden City, NY, USA
Phone
5165727943
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$776,671
Expenses
$755,805
Assets
$4,413,475
Liabilities
$270,154

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN LIENAU (ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RUDELL J BREEDY (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUDELL J BREEDY (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $178,983 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN LIENAU (ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $26,198 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation is a not-for-profit corporation organized under the laws of New York state for the principal purpose of accepting, holding, investing and administering any proceeds or properties resulting from gifts, bequests, devises or fundraising activities and disbursing or donating the income or principal thereof for benefit of nassau community college including, among other things, the making of grants and scholarships to faculty and students, the making of grants to nassau community college for operating and capital expenditures, and financial assistance for continuing development of the faculty and staff and programs of nassau community college.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation provides support for a range of faculty professional development activities including workshop and symposia attendance, travel and the presentation of programming both on-campus and virtual.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.84; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $616K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 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: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.