Seattle Pacific University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910565553
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2062812066
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
University or Technological Institute
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,323,721
Expenses
$135,071,987
Assets
$321,052,996
Liabilities
$99,939,427

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEANA PORTERFIELD (PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTEN BROWN (CHIEF OF STAFF, SPECIAL ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT F)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEANA PORTERFIELD (PRESIDENT): $469,293 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY SAWERS (VP FOR BUSINESS & FINANCE): $292,941 total reported compensation
  • DOUGLAS TAYLOR (VP FOR UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT): $243,089 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Seattle pacific university is a christian university fully committed to engaging the culture and changing the world by graduating people of competence and character, becoming people of wisdom, and modeling grace-filled community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public services: the university operates a conference services program at its seattle campus, providing a facility for diverse groups of nonprofit organizations to build community and provide educational opportunities for their constituents. The university offers all these groups a place to reflect, excel, discover and grow. This year there were 52 groups that used these facilities. In addition, the university, through grant funding, is also partnering with various congregations in providing participation grants for the development of their young adult ministries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 33rd 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.38; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $119.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $469K · 27 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.1M reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.