Duke Global Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611588319
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9196842006
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,063,548
Expenses
$4,407,130
Assets
$2,211,496
Liabilities
$1,620,918

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARBARA HOUGH (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA KELSO (PART YEAR VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY FRANCES LUCE (PART YEAR VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM BOULDING (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER FRANCIS (FORMER OFFICER): $2,985,728 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL G ENNIS (FORMER OFFICER): $1,537,454 total reported compensation
  • JAMES SCOTT GIBSON (DIRECTOR/TREASURER): $1,060,349 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Support duke university by conducting educational and research activities outside the united states.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education, training, research and development of academic institutions in furtherance of duke university's mission.

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 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.73; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.3% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3M · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 51 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.