The Saint Constantine School
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474033909
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8329757075
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,229,538
- Expenses
- $13,580,582
- Assets
- $14,588,386
- Liabilities
- $9,697,133
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- DR JOHN REYNOLDS (BOARD DIRECTOR): $174,671 total reported compensation
- MEGAN MUELLER (EMPLOYEE): $155,000 total reported compensation
- ENNIE HICKMAN (EMPLOYEE): $150,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide classical, christian education so that our students will grow in wisdom, virtue, and joy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Saint constantine college provides classical orthodox higher education to a community of students seeking virtue, wisdom, and joy. Through the integration of christian tradition, dialectical pedagogy, and the great texts, the college welcomes students into the work of the church and the commonwealth.the saint constantine school k-12 provides classical, christian education for the whole person. We are dedicated to providing a comprehensive formational education that is engaging, rigorous, and in harmony with the eastern orthodox church.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 62% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 59
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.7%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $98.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd 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: 9.6%; rating input score 10; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 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: Limited
- 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: 10.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.7% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $993K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.