The Legacy Funds of Holy Names University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941358307
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104361000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,314,693
Expenses
$1,787,352
Assets
$73,340,341
Liabilities
$586,074

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROL SELLMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - End April 2025)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL SELLMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - End April 2025): $105,000 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 Legacy Funds of Holy Names University provides student scholarships to increase access to higher education for students representing marginalized communities in Oakland CA and the wider Bay Area. This purpose honors the legacy and values of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary and the over 150-year history of education at Holy Names University.

What it reported doing in 2024

During Fiscal Year 2025 The Legacy Funds of Holy Names University provided 117 student scholarships to increase access to higher education for students representing marginalized communities in Oakland CA and the wider Bay Area. This purpose honors the legacy and values of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary and the over 150-year history of education at Holy Names University.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 42.9%; rating input score 43
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -36%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 41.03; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 42.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $767K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $594K reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 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: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.