Shawnee State University Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311115810
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portsmouth, OH, USA
Phone
7403513005
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,458,447
Expenses
$2,954,589
Assets
$41,566,623
Liabilities
$2,885,425

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS MOORE (SSUF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • AIMEE WELCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LISA JOHNSON (SSUF BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIC BRAUN (SSU PRESIDENTSSUF BOARD MEMBER): $347,488 total reported compensation
  • GREG BALLENGEE (SSUF TREASURER): $175,852 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS MOORE (SSUF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $139,865 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 shawnee state university foundation (ssuf) was created as a 501(c)(3) organization with the mission of making friends and creating funds and support for shawnee state university.

What it reported doing in 2024

Student financial aid in the form of academic scholarships and awards, and need-based scholarships and loans provided to students helps the institution attract the best students and allow students who might otherwise not be afforded a college education to attend shawnee state university. All scholarship payments totaling $506,780 were paid to shawnee state university on behalf of the enrolled award recipient students for partial payment of tuition, fees and/or other expenses directly related to education. The number of unique scholarship recipients during fiscal year 2025 was 300. The foundation also made payments to the university during fiscal year 2025 totaling $1,678,540 to benefit various university projects and programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.6%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.3%; rating input score 95; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 20th 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: 14.6%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.07; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.6% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $347K · 21 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.