Marshall B. Ketchum University

Legal name: Marshall B Ketchum University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951644593
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Fullerton, CA, USA
Phone
7144497400
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Graduate, Professional Schools (Separate Entities)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,867,618
Expenses
$43,764,930
Assets
$153,378,861
Liabilities
$42,356,198

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JULIE SCHORNACK (PRESIDENT)
  • JUDY ORTIZ (VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS)
  • KEVIN ALEXANDER (PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • CARMEN BARNHARDT (VICE PRESIDENT FOR STUDENT SERVICES)
  • WENDELYN HOLTZEN (VICE PRESIDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR JULIE SCHORNACK (PRESIDENT): $590,570 total reported compensation
  • JUDY ORTIZ (VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS): $355,466 total reported compensation
  • ERIC BORSTING (DEAN OF SCCO): $341,952 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 mission of Marshall B. Ketchum University is to educate caring, inspired health care professionals who are prepared to deliver collaborative, patient-centric health care in an interprofessional environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule oresearch: the university supports research within the three university programs, the colleges of optometry and pharmacy and the school of physician assistant studies. The university provides administrative, and financial resources to faculty and students who engage in research.the southern California college of optometry at mbku has 35 full-time faculty. A total of 32 faculty studies were active during the year, that included externally-funded studies (e.g., grants from nih, professional organizations, foundations and industry), and self-funded studies. The ms in vision science program had 6 projects active during the year and 1 active student research elective. Total external grant revenue for the period was $416,034 and there were 20 peer-reviewed publications.the college of pharmacy is composed of two departments, pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy practice.the department of pharmacy practice has 12 full-time faculty members, with 11 as pharmacy clinical faculty and 1 non-clinical faculty member. During the year, pharmacy practice faculty produced 36 peer-reviewed publications or presentations and 4 externally funded reseach projects or grants.the department of pharmaceutical sciences (dps) has 7 full-time faculty members whose research included external grants, such as one from the us department of agriculture. Total direct grant revenue for the period was $25,698 and there were a total of 9 peer-reviewed publications or presentations.the school of physician assistant studies at mbku had 8 full-time and 5 part-time faculty. Scholarly research activities are integral to the masters capstone project (mcp) which had a total of 8 completed. The spas program had a class of 40 enrolled students for 2025. There was no direct grant revenue for the period and there were 4 total peer-reviewed publications or presentations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 40th 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: 47.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.5; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 77.1% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $36.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $591K · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.