Sussex County Community College Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 223785342
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Newton, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 9733002121
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $897,809
- Expenses
- $409,846
- Assets
- $4,847,704
- Liabilities
- $471,972
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR JON CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)
- CORY HOMER (INTERIM PRESIDENT)
- STAN KULA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- STAN KULA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $158,083 total reported compensation
- DR KETAN GANDHI (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $43,950 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 foundation for sussex county community college enhances the college's mission of providing educational excellence and cultural opportunities to the residents of sussex county and beyond. The foundation supports the mission through fundraising and friend - raising efforts on the college's behalf. Funds are generated through annual giving campaigns, special events, and direct contirbutions. The funds raising support student scholarships, infrastructure, and expansion.
What it reported doing in 2024
To assist sussex county community college's growth in scholarships, new programs, faculty development, to offer educational opportunities to those seeking post secondary education, and to offer community and cultural activities to residents of sussex county and beyond.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 25.7%; rating input score 26
- Program expense ratio: 41.5%; rating input score 42
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 54.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.83; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 25.7% of revenue deployed · 41.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $170K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 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: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.