Trinity Higher Education Authority Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742534486
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Waco, TX, USA
Phone
2547530915
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Financial Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$251,075
Expenses
$111,752
Assets
$15,077,442
Liabilities
$14,938,119

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Murray Watson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Murray Watson (President): $1,140,869 total reported compensation
  • Ricky Turman (EVP/CFO): $491,616 total reported compensation
  • Thomas Ben Litle (EVP/COO): $486,834 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Trinity higher education authority is a secondary market of college student loans under the federal family education loan program (ffelp). Trinity higher education authority's mission is to make education a reality by supporting programs and initiatives to finance educational opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2017

Trinity higher education authority serviced over 1,800 loans totaling over $13 million under the title iv family education loan program (ffelp). These loans were funded through permanent financing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.3%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 55.5%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 134.92; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 322%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -22.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2009 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 26 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.