Francis Marion University Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200118161
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Florence, SC, USA
Phone
8436611131
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,752,335
Expenses
$7,497,554
Assets
$27,097,598
Liabilities
$14,090,848

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARRYL BRIDGES (TREASURER-VICE PRESIDENT FOR FINANCE & FACILITIES)
  • HAIEASHA SINGLETARY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DARRYL BRIDGES (TREASURER-VICE PRESIDENT FOR FINANCE & FACILITIES): $259,401 total reported compensation
  • HAIEASHA SINGLETARY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $78,939 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of francis marion university, specifically in management of student housing, other real property, and acceptance of gifts and other support as agreed upon by the foundation's board of directors and the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation, as part of its mission to support the university, is required to operate, maintain, and lease housing facilities for students and faculty. The pr0gram service is carried out through the foundation's single member fmu student housing, llc. All revenue generated by the llc from housing services are managed and held by the foundation. Housing services are provided primarily during the fall and spring semesters with minor revenues being received for summer semesters, fees and fines and summer camp housing for fmu summer programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.61; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.8% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $259K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $259K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.