Southern Methodist University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750800689
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2147682090
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,181,490,564
Expenses
$1,097,826,408
Assets
$4,622,305,987
Liabilities
$797,530,057

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

Leadership & pay

58 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert G Turner (President/Trustee)
  • Elizabeth Loboa (Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew Enfield (Head Basketball Coach -Current): $7,606,787 total reported compensation
  • Thomas R Lashlee (Head Football Coach): $4,929,298 total reported compensation
  • Robert Lanier (Head Basketball Coach): $4,775,095 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 primary mission of the University is education through research and teaching by creating and imparting knowledge that will shape citizens who contribute to their communities and lead professions in a global society.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sponsored Research: Sponsored research includes expenditures for all activities that are part of the University's research program, including activities specifically organized to produce research outcomes, whether commissioned by an agency external to the institution or separately budgeted by an organizational unit within the institution.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 7.1%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.21; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 39 of 42 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $977.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7.6M · 58 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $118.5M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.