Texas A&M Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742245072
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
College Station, TX, US
Phone
979.845.8161
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$433,941,574
Expenses
$241,581,065
Assets
$3,738,939,807
Liabilities
$425,304,772

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TYSON T VOELKEL (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • TYSON T VOELKEL (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,392,275 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL D PIA (CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER): $1,323,125 total reported compensation
  • JOHN MORRIS (SR VP DEVELOPMENT): $699,170 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 Texas A&M Foundation supports Texas A&M University and future generations of Aggies through philanthropy and stewardship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Departmental Support: Provide needed funds to support the University's College, School, Institute, Center and programmatic departmental needs and activities through both non-endowed funds and funds generated from endowments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.8%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • 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: Scored; rating input score 0

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: 44.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.48; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th 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: 59.8% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $163.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 18 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 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: 15 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: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.