William Carey International University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953156658
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6263982246
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,156,676
Expenses
$3,050,764
Assets
$77,541,526
Liabilities
$240,859

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL CORNELIUS (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL CORNELIUS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $142,963 total reported compensation
  • PETER MCLALLEN (PROVOST): $100,021 total reported compensation
  • AMY BOOTHE (CFO): $9,167 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 mission of wciu is to provide innovative distance education programs to enhance the effectiveness of scholar practitioners as they serve with others to develop transformational solutions to the roots of human problems around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

In this fiscal year, wciu grew its student enrollment by 93% almost doubling the previous year. -enrollment in the ma programs grew by 80%-enrollment in the ph.d. Program increased by 250%graduation rates increased by 100%

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.8%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 49.3%; rating input score 49; 15th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.6%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 25.42; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.8% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $352K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.