ASU Enterprise Partners
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475599177
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Tempe, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 4809653759
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $26,141,383
- Expenses
- $25,478,371
- Assets
- $394,391,590
- Liabilities
- $121,413,387
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AUGUSTINE CHENG (MANAGING DIRECTOR & CEO (SI))
- DANIEL DILLON (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- AUGUSTINE CHENG (MANAGING DIRECTOR & CEO (SI)): $647,650 total reported compensation
- JEFF MINDLIN (CHIEF INVEST. OFFICER/MANAGING DIR. UR): $445,091 total reported compensation
- MERIDITH RENTZ (CHIEF ENTERPRISE PARTNERS OFFICER): $418,196 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
ASU Enterprise Partners is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to provide an ecosystem of services to create solutions and generate resources to extend Arizona State University’s reach and advance its charter.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule oasuep through its subsidiary university realty aims to advance asu by accepting and monetizing commercial office, retail, and multifamily buildings. Additionally, they take advantage of opportunities to invest, acquire, and dispose of real estate at logical points in real estate cycles. Building design, construction, and financing of office, industrial, and multi-family projects. Currently, the organization holds $44.8 million in land and building investments. University realty oversees projects nationwide, from skysong in scottsdale, to brickyard in tempe, to the Washington center in the heart of the district of columbia, to the herald examiner building in los angeles.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.6%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 60%; rating input score 60
- Fundraising efficiency: $61.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th 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: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- 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: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st 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: 2.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.48; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -11.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 64.6% of revenue deployed · 60% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $15.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $648K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.4M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 14 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.
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.