Texas Christian University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 750827465
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8172575122
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,250,018,653
- Expenses
- $1,091,646,077
- Assets
- $4,881,798,177
- Liabilities
- $1,212,705,842
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
74 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Daniel W Pullin (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Sonny Dykes (Head Football Coach): $6,386,809 total reported compensation
- James P Dixon (Mens Basketball Coach): $4,741,613 total reported compensation
- Victor J Boschini Jr (Chancellor): $3,499,401 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To educate individuals to think and act as ethical leaders and responsible citizens in the global community. TCU is the largest of 21 institutions associated by an ongoing covenant with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). A protestant denomination with Presbyterian and Baptist roots, the Disciples’ vision statement speaks of “true community, deep Christian spirituality and a passion for justice.” This continued relationship supports an approach to education that values scholarship, reason and intellectual inquiry while honoring the importance of every individual’s religious identity. Today’s TCU students come from more than 60 religious traditions and faiths. With the full support of the Disciples, TCU is committed to the highest standards of academic inquiry, affording students the rigorou.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule o
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 85% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 35th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- 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: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95.9%; rating input score 96; 50th 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: 12.7%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.47; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 47 of 49 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $960.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6.4M · 74 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $130.1M reported
- Consistency: 48 of 49 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: 28 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 17 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.