Roger Williams University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050277222
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Bristol, RI, USA
Phone
4012531040
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$246,287,787
Expenses
$245,019,933
Assets
$291,320,427
Liabilities
$120,875,944

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

Leadership & pay

45 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ioannis N Miaoulis (President)
  • Amy Sullivan Berkeley (Vice President of Institutional Advancement)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ioannis N Miaoulis (President): $1,433,556 total reported compensation
  • Margaret C Everett (Provost): $401,470 total reported compensation
  • Brian Williams (Chief of Staff): $368,369 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O.

What it reported doing in 2024

Higher Education: Roger Williams University (the "University"), located in Bristol and Providence, Rhode Island, is a private, coeducational university with programs in the liberal arts and the professions that includes the Feinstein Schools of Humanities, Arts and Education and Social and Natural Sciences, the Cummings School of Architecture, the Mario J. Gabelli School of Business, the School of Engineering, Computing and Construction Management, the School of Justice Studies and University College. The University offers more than 50 majors and 70 minors of undergraduate study and 13 graduate degrees, along with numerous minors and certificate programs. The University is accredited by the New England Commission of Higher Education, Inc, among other accrediting bodies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 92% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.3%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th 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: 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: 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: 93.5%; rating input score 94; 44th 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: 0.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.3% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 31 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $226.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 45 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 51 of 52 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 13 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: 10 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.

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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.