Norwalk Community College Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 066080293
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Norwalk, CT, USA
- Phone
- 2038577262
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community or Junior Colleges
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,429,705
- Expenses
- $2,897,561
- Assets
- $40,414,045
- Liabilities
- $1,218,287
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NANCY VON EULER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- KRIS YEAGER (CFO): $153,011 total reported compensation
- VINCENT A MURPHY (DIRECTOR): $115,668 total reported compensation
- NANCY VON EULER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $95,584 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 mission of the norwalk community college foundation is threefold: 1) raise funds for ct state community college norwalk programs and scholarships. (2) invest, administer and distribute funds so that students of all ages continue to benefit from challenging opportunities for self-improvement and intellectual growth. (3) inspire and engage our community to share talents and resources.
What it reported doing in 2024
The distribution of scholarships is one of the primary objectives of the foundation. In the 2024/2025 academic year, 579 students were awarded scholarships. The amount reported above is for the fiscal year ending june 30, 2025. Scholarships bestow on students a valuable sense of recognition and accomplishment as well as important financial support. Our scholarship donors include private individuals, corporations, and foundations, all of whom are committed to making an education affordable for ct state norwalk students. The foundation's scholarship process is competitive, and academic achievement is a primary consideration. However, financial need, special circumstances, and personal qualities are also considered in awarding scholarships. Scholarship applications are administered according to policies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.5%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.5%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.95; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99.5% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 23 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.