Dumac

Legal name: Dumac Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900754895
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9196686829
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,760,785
Expenses
$32,215,580
Assets
$33,308,088
Liabilities
$27,143,949

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NEAL F TRIPLETT (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEAL F TRIPLETT (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT): $5,012,725 total reported compensation
  • VINCENT E PRICE (DIRECTOR): $2,200,045 total reported compensation
  • ANIL MADHOK (PART YEAR TREASURER): $2,064,274 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

DUMAC manages Duke University's endowment assets

What it reported doing in 2024

Dumac, inc. Operates as a supporting organization to duke university. All of the expenses incurred are related to the investment management and related services provided on a not-for-profit, cost-sharing basis to duke university, its affiliates (including duke university health system, inc. The employees' retirement plan of duke university) and the duke endowment, a private foundation which under the terms of its indenture and by action of its separate board of trustees provides substantial support to duke university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -1.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 94.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5M · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 53 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Conflict-of-interest policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.