Old Dominion University Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
546068198
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Norfolk, VA, USA
Phone
7576834293
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,665,864
Expenses
$95,485,145
Assets
$57,258,519
Liabilities
$35,732,190

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MR DAVID K EDWARDS (PRESIDENT)
  • MS KAREN DZUPINKA (VICE PRESIDENT/TREASURER)
  • SHANNON ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR BRIAN HEMPHILL (TRUSTEE): $969,195 total reported compensation
  • DR KENNETH FRIDLEY (TRUSTEE): $607,594 total reported compensation
  • MR CHAD REED (TRUSTEE): $576,248 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Serves as the administrative and fiscal agent for sponsored research, training grants and other sponsored programs for old dominion university, a commonwealth of Virginia institution of higher education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 68.8%; rating input score 69; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 2.2%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.7% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $87.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $969K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.4M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 131 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 127 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.
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.