Texas Tech Foundation, Inc.

Legal name: Texas Tech Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 756043842
IRS 990 coverage: 2009–2024
Official website data refreshed: Sep 2026
Forms available: Form 990 2024
Location: Lubbock, TX, US
Phone: 806.742.8834
Rating: 77
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $226,572,047
Expenses: $108,030,866
Assets: $1,127,859,899
Liabilities: $8,041,276

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

PATRICK KRAMER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

JAMES MAULDIN (TREASURER): $495,443 total reported compensation
PATRICK KRAMER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $416,173 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 Tech Foundation advocates for successful performance by: positioning the Texas Tech University System as an institution of distinction; raising funds on behalf of the universities and health sciences centers; stewarding funds, caring for donors (nurturing, informing and appreciating) and reporting on gifts and endowments; partnering with the Board of Regents on investment and oversight; supporting and promoting all colleges, schools, programs and campuses of the Texas Tech University System.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization was founded to function as a conduit for the acceptance, investment, and distribution of private gifts given for the activities and programs related to the mission, role, and scope of the Texas tech university system. During 2024-2025 the foundation transferred $104,970,496 to the Texas tech university system and affiliated foundations.

Operating model

Revenue model: Donor-supported. 82% 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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 72
Transparency & Controls: 71
Accountability: 86
Sustainability: 94
Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 52.1%; rating input score 52
Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
Fundraising efficiency: $1,075.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st 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; 77th 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: 52.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.44; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
Where the money goes: 52.1% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $105M in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $495K · 34 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M reported
Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
Related organizations: 3 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.

Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.