The College Board Exposed: Nonprofit Or $1.6 Billion Testing Monopoly In Disguise?

Forbes

26-05-2025

Students testing on computers
Founded 1900 to democratize college access, the College Board now straddles an uncomfortable line between its nonprofit mission and corporate-scale revenues. While technically structured as a member organization—with 6,000 high schools and colleges paying annual dues—its financial reality tells a different story.
The math reveals a stark imbalance. Since its inception, cumulative membership dues may total $1.5 billion when adjusted for inflation, but that pales next to the $10+ billion reaped from SATs and AP exams since 1990. This reliance on testing revenue has reshaped the organization's priorities, transforming it from a collaborative membership alliance into a de facto corporate entity with a testing monopoly.
Three strategies underpin the College Board's financial dominance. First, its testing empire operates like a well-oiled machine. The SAT suite—taken by 2 million students annually—generates $200–300 million from base fees and ancillary charges like $15 score reports. Meanwhile, the Advanced Placement (AP) program, which administered 5 million exams at $99 each in 2025, rakes in nearly $500 million, supplemented by millions from course materials and teacher training . Even middle schoolers are monetized through the PSAT 8/9, a controversial exam for 13-year-olds that locks schools into multi-year testing contracts.
Second, the organization has funneled $1.32 billion to Caribbean subsidiaries since 2011; a maneuver critics allege minimizes taxes on its approximately almost $2 billion in assets. Third, perhaps most ethically fraught, is its reliance on underpaid educators. Teachers grade AP exams for about $30/hour—less than half the rate of private tutors—similar to the honorarium paid to SAT proctors. Schools generally pay the cost of proctoring the PSAT. This labor model saves the College Board millions of dollars annually, often subsidizing profits through public school budgets.
Recent controversies highlight how financial incentives increasingly override educational goals. The 2025 digital SAT rollout was plagued by technical failures, the launch stranded students mid-test, with critics accusing the College Board of rushing to outpace its rival, the ACT . Technical issues with AP Classroom and this year's AP Psychology exam further erodes confidence. Its handling of the AP African American Studies curriculum sparked outrage when the organization diluted course content amid political pushback.
Even the pandemic failed to curb revenue-first thinking. Despite 1,900 colleges adopting test-optional policies post-COVID, the College Board lobbied aggressively to preserve SAT mandates. Such decisions align with CEO David Coleman's over $2.5 million compensation package—triple the average for nonprofit leaders—raising questions about whom the organization truly serves.
The Advanced Placement program embodies the College Board's contradictions. While studies show AP courses improve college readiness for underserved students, barriers persist. Exams cost $99 each—a burden for low-income districts—and recent recalibrating of test scores have sparked concerns about score inflation.
Moreover, schools often narrow curricula to align with AP frameworks, sidelining electives and critical thinking. AP's benefits are real but uneven. The program's success hinges on equitable access, yet the College Board profits from the very inequities it claims to address. The College Board does offer discounts for documented low income students, but the over $50 fee is still steep for low-income students.
The College Board's legacy is a study in contrasts. On one hand, AP courses correlate with higher college graduation rates, and standardized metrics help colleges evaluate applicants across diverse educational backgrounds. On the other, its products perpetuate systemic inequities. SAT scores, for instance, continue to be highly correlated with family income. At the same time, the PSAT 8/9 exemplifies profit-driven priorities, subjecting 13-year-olds to high-stakes testing with scant evidence of academic benefit.
Compounding these issues is the organization's labor exploitation. By outsourcing proctoring and grading to underpaid educators, the College Board extracts value from public schools while privatizing profits—a dynamic that mirrors gig economy practices more than educational stewardship.
The College Board must undergo a radical transformation to reclaim its nonprofit mission. Executive pay should align with nonprofit norms (under $500,000), not corporate benchmarks. Testing for students under 16 ought to be eliminated entirely, freeing schools from costly, developmentally inappropriate mandates. Proctoring and grading labor must be fairly compensated, and offshore financial dealings must be disclosed to the public.
Until these reforms materialize, the organization's 125-year legacy will remain shadowed by a question at the heart of its identity: Who benefits most—students or shareholders?
The College Board's nonprofit status hinges on a delicate balance—one increasingly tilted toward Wall Street, not classrooms. As education evolves, stakeholders must demand accountability from an organization that shapes millions of futures… and profits immensely from uncertainty.