Upper Iowa University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
420680372
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Fayette, Iowa, USA
Phone
800-553-4150
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,001,254
Expenses
$52,478,722
Assets
$105,804,386
Liabilities
$81,791,201

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHY FRANKEN (PRESIDENT AND CFO)
  • WILLIAM DUFFY (FORMER: EMERITUS PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHY FRANKEN (PRESIDENT AND CFO): $320,882 total reported compensation
  • DOUG BINSFELD (VP ACADEMIC AFFAIRS): $196,174 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM DUFFY (FORMER: EMERITUS PRESIDENT): $179,462 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Upper Iowa University provides lifelong learning opportunities through flexible, affordable, and quality educational programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education, instruction, and support - upper Iowa university served 4,026 students worldwide. The fayette campus served 503 traditional undergraduate students, drawing the majority of these students from Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois. The university is diverse in its ethnicity, race, gender, economics, and geography. Undergraduate degrees are offered through the school of education, the school of business, and the school of arts and sciences. Upper Iowa university offers several master's degrees, both online and face-to-face. Master's degrees are available in education, business administration, healthcare administration, counseling, sport administration, and public administration. Post-graduate certificates also are available in accounting, corporate financial management, human resource management, literacy coach, teacher leadership and organizational development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% 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 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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; 43rd 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 12 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $39.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.7M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.