Union Commonwealth University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
610461768
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Barbourville, KY, USA
Phone
6065461204
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,995,168
Expenses
$38,046,534
Assets
$68,655,986
Liabilities
$17,842,611

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

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR DONALD WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC EVANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY)
  • CLAY BUTLER (VICE PRESIDENT: ATHLETICS)
  • STEPHANIE SMITH (VICE PRESIDENT: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT & DEAN OF STUDE)
  • MEGHANN CHESNUT (SPECIAL ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA WILKEY (PROVOST & VICE PRESIDENT OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MARCIA HAWKINS (FORMER PRESIDENT (THRU 06/30/24)): $162,210 total reported compensation
  • DR DONALD WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT): $151,948 total reported compensation
  • DAVID WILLIAMS (VP OF ENROLLMENT): $135,370 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Union is grounded by four pillars that define our focus as an academic institution: service to each other and our communities; our appalachian culture and heritage; our core affiliation with methodism and the liberal arts academic experience. Union serves each of its students with a sincere commitment to strengthen those pillars, to spark passion and inspire lifelong learning in all they do.

What it reported doing in 2024

1644 total students, ug students 859, gr students 796, 378 students graduated during fy 2025, 155 ug and 223 gr students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $33.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 38 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.6M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.