Siena Heights University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381366958
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Adrian, MI, USA
Phone
800-521-0009
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$66,532,162
Expenses
$59,525,325
Assets
$50,886,639
Liabilities
$16,475,407

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS PALMER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUGLAS PALMER (PRESIDENT): $300,759 total reported compensation
  • CHERI BETZ (VP OF ADMINISTRATION & INNOVATION): $203,611 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL ORLANDO (VP OF STUDENT AFFAIRS - PART YEAR): $130,342 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 help students become more competent, purposeful and ethical.

What it reported doing in 2024

Siena heights university is a Michigan private non-profit corporation for postsecondary education. The university provides education with a main campus, satellite campuses, and online for both traditional and nontraditional students offering bachelor and master degree programs. The main campus also offers auxiliary services in the form of housing, meal plans, and bookstore services. The university is primarily supported through tuition, federal and state grants, and contributions for operations and scholarships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% 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 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96%; rating input score 96; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 70.3% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 25 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $46.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $301K · 34 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.