Queensborough Community College Auxiliary Enterprise Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112037770
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bayside, NY, USA
Phone
7182815344
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,041,381
Expenses
$3,102,890
Assets
$7,610,178
Liabilities
$148,099

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINE MANGINO (CHAIRPERSON): $507,570 total reported compensation
  • PHYLLIS CURTIS-TWEED (PROVOST & VP): $304,710 total reported compensation
  • GISSETTE FORTE (TREASURER): $285,369 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 auxiliary services, such as food services, parking facilities, a bookstore, etc. For the benefit of the campus community of the queensborough community college.

What it reported doing in 2024

The auxiliary's primary exempt mission is to support the students of queensborough community college. The organization is dedicated to meeting the educational, social, and recreational needs of queensborough college's students, faculty, staff, alumni, and community. To compliment the college's educational mission, the organization provides various facilities, services, co-curricular activities, and programs, such as the athletic/recreation buildings, research centers, computing centers, etc. The auxiliary offers opportunities for active learning experiences in citizenship, leadership, and individual and group responsibilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 53.8%; rating input score 54; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: -2%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.9% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $508K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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: Independent voting board scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.