National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541204566
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028222106
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$857,371
Expenses
$633,389
Assets
$721,764
Liabilities
$422,555

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James Bergeron (President until 125)
  • Alexander Ricci (President as of 425)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stefanie Gramm (Director Operations and Meetings): $118,606 total reported compensation
  • James Bergeron (President until 125): $89,213 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide superior advocacy, communications, regulatory analysis and engagement, and operational support to its members so they may effectively help students and families develop, pay for, and achieve their career, training, and postsecondary educational goals.

What it reported doing in 2024

NCHER holds two major educational conferences each year, which spans across the diverse memberships needs and addresses their areas of expertise. The NCHER Legislative and Leadership Conference is geared toward executive level staff in an effort to keep them abreast of federal and state developments impacting the higher education finance industry. The NCHER Annual Conference is open and designed for everyone across the industry and provides attendees with ample opportunities to network, learn, and take information back home that they can use in their current jobs from hearing about the current trends and hot topics to exploring new and potential business opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.1%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.6% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $503K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $330K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.