St Mary's College of Maryland Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237152890
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Marys City, MD, USA
Phone
2408954282
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,470,282
Expenses
$4,553,934
Assets
$60,519,266
Liabilities
$1,574,336

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL SCHIFFMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • THOMASINA HIERS-JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CAROLYN CURRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROLYN CURRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $312,425 total reported compensation
  • JACQUELINE WRIGHT (DIRECTOR OF FOUND. FIN. AND ADMIN.): $161,537 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to initiate, cultivate and maintain strong lifelong relationships with alumni, friends and partners by creating a culture of giving, volunteer leadership and exemplary fiduciary responsibility toward the goal of a bright future as a preferred public liberal arts honors institution.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarship and awards support- provide scholarship and internship support, awards and research stipends to students of st. Mary's college of Maryland. In fy25, 262 scholarships from 89 funds were awarded. There were 90 awards given to students, many at awards convocation honoring outstanding student achievements. 7 students were provided support to enable them to complete an internship, which provides an excellent setting for professional development, workplace discipline, subject specific job experience and networking opportunities. 10 students were awarded stipends to help with undergraduate research projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.29; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $312K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $230K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.