Maryville University
Legal name: Maryville University - St Louis
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 430653369
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- (314) 529-9300; (800) 627-9855
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $171,685,559
- Expenses
- $174,049,423
- Assets
- $286,744,054
- Liabilities
- $114,835,870
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR MARK LOMBARDI (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DR MARK LOMBARDI (PRESIDENT): $1,656,133 total reported compensation
- PHILIP KOMARNY (CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER): $711,916 total reported compensation
- DR STEVEN MANDEVILLE (TREASURER, VP OF FINANCE AND FACILITIES): $584,539 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
In support of our strategic plan as it relates to access and in alignment with our admissions philosophy of holistic review, each applicant will be reviewed based upon their academic record, extracurricular activities, recommendations and essay for evidence of potential for success in college. Test-Optional will not apply to the following groups of students – Prospective student athletes are mandated by the NCAA to submit standardized test scores for athletic eligibility.
What it reported doing in 2024
Auxiliary enterprises to include operation of on-campus residence halls and apartments, campus dining for students and staff, and operation of the university bookstore.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 27 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $142.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.7M · 34 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $37.4M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.