Notre Dame of Maryland University

Legal name: Notre Dame of Maryland University Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520591641
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
410-532-5200
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,088,616
Expenses
$69,852,023
Assets
$159,700,547
Liabilities
$35,988,237

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

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARYLOU YAM (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARYLOU YAM (PRESIDENT): $412,301 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW SHIMODA (DEAN - SCHOOL OF PHARMACY): $221,731 total reported compensation
  • MARTHA WALKER (ACADEMIC AFFAIRS): $215,749 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Notre Dame of Maryland University is a Catholic university that educates and inspires students to lead lives of purpose and service.

What it reported doing in 2024

Notre dame of Maryland university (ndmu) is a comprehensive coeducational university offering traditional undergraduate programs, accelerated adult programs, graduate, ph.d./pharmacy, level and certificate programs. The university with 29 majors in the woman's college, eight coeducational majors in our college of adult undergraduate studies (caus), and 13 masters, three doctoral, and ten certificate programs in our graduate and professional studies program (grad), is entering its 130th academic year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 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: 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: -4.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.29; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 78.4% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $51.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $412K · 38 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.2M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.