Medical University of South Carolina Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
576028985
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Charleston, SC, US
Phone
843-792-2300
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Medical Disciplines Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,664,063
Expenses
$81,004,152
Assets
$944,238,249
Liabilities
$165,469,379

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STUART AMES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • STUART AMES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $635,452 total reported compensation
  • ROBYN FRAMPTON (COO/EXECUTIVE VICE PRES.): $228,314 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW MUSE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFF. THRU SEPT '24): $133,418 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 MUSC Foundation's Board of Directors shapes the foundation's direction through its mission, strategy, budget and key policies; ensures that the leadership, resources and finances in place match the foundation's vision; and monitors and improves the performance of the organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Student scholarships - the musc enterprise is focused on the affordability of medical education through scholarship opportunities for students. To this effort, the foundation has partnered with musc to increase its support of scholarships now and in the future. Significant scholarship support was awarded across all six colleges that enabled students to begin or continue their goals in medical education. The resources provided by the foundation were combined with other resources of musc to create an ever growing base of awarded dollars to these students. In fy 2025, 19 new scholarship funds were established.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 91
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 40.7%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.66; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st 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: 58.1% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $66M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $635K · 34 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 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: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.