Students of Georgetown Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237204383
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2026879887
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,905,803
- Expenses
- $1,880,321
- Assets
- $2,868,474
- Liabilities
- $1,441,570
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SUNIL ROSEN (PRES. & CEO (3/2025-6/2025))
- MATT SHIN (PRES. & CEO (7/2024-2/2025))
Highest reported compensation
- KATHERINE CALLOW (V.P. & COO (7/2024-2/2025)): $17,085 total reported compensation
- YEVHENIIA KOLOMOIETS (V.P. & COO (3/2025-6/2025)): $13,069 total reported compensation
- MATT SHIN (PRES. & CEO (7/2024-2/2025)): $10,473 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 corp's mission is "students serving students". The corp provides low cost goods and services to the georgetown university community and its activities provide educational benefits to its student employees through practical experience. Through each of its program services described, the corp's objective is to provide unparalleled business experience to its employees and management (all employees as well as management and the board of directors are undergraduate students of georgetown university) by providing necessary goods and services at low cost to the student body and others within the university community. All services of the corp are located within the campus of georgetown university.
What it reported doing in 2024
Vital vittles (vittles) is a small grocery/convenience store located in the student center of georgetown university. Vittles has been the predominant operation of the corp since its inception in 1972. The corp is managed wholly by undergraduate students of georgetown univ. & is the largest undergraduate student run organization of its kind in the entire united states. The corp's objective is to provide unparalleled business experience to its employees & management (all employees as well as management & the board of directors are undergraduate students of georgetown univ.) by providing necessary goods and services at low cost to the student body and others within the univ. Community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 48
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 79.5%; rating input score 79; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 42.9%; rating input score 43; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $17K · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 43/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.