Angier B Duke Memorial Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136113895
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7043760291
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,985,881
Expenses
$1,565,859
Assets
$41,932,115
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RHETT N MABRY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RHETT N MABRY (PRESIDENT): $1,132,380 total reported compensation
  • KAREN H ROGERS (CFO, TREASURER & SECRETARY): $518,306 total reported compensation
  • K TODD WALKER (DIRECTOR OF INVESTMENTS): $501,626 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To develop scholarships and to promote and further the arts, sciences, and professions at duke university and for that purpose to establish scholarships and to assist worthy students at the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

The angier b. Duke memorial, inc. Is a nonprofit membership corporation established in 1925 to develop scholarships and to promote and further the arts, sciences, and professions and to assist worthy students. The memorial limits its assistance for these purposes to duke university. At duke, the memorial contributes to the angier b. Duke memorial scholarship program of duke university which awards scholarships to individuals with demonstrated academic and personal achievement and outstanding promise of success in their chosen fields. Awards consist of full tuition; six weeks of summer study at new college, oxford; the option of two semesters of study abroad or elsewhere in the u.s.; and in some cases additional financial assistance, if there is demonstrated need.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 21.2%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.78; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.