The Open University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
980426561
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2019
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom
Phone
+44 (0)1908 274066
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$584,883,534
Expenses
$536,048,545
Assets
$845,427,921
Liabilities
$337,636,534

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

40 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY KELLETT (VICE-CHANCELLOR (UNT. 9/30/19)): $336,923 total reported compensation
  • LAURENCE HOLDEN (GROUP FIN DIR (UNT. 12/31/19)): $333,014 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER YOULES (CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER): $244,057 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The OU was founded to open up higher education to all, regardless of background or circumstances. Our mission is to be open to people, places, methods and ideas, and as such, equality and diversity are at the heart of everything we do.

What it reported doing in 2019

See schedule o

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 61.9%; rating input score 62; 17th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 74.4% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $434M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $337K · 40 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $56.7M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.