University of Georgia Foundation

Legal name: The University of Georgia Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
586033837
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Athens, GA, United States
Phone
706-542-6677
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$327,275,361
Expenses
$212,564,103
Assets
$2,373,628,484
Liabilities
$97,906,377

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

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERE MOREHEAD (EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEE - PRESIDENT)
  • JILL WALTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JERE MOREHEAD (EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEE - PRESIDENT): $1,045,881 total reported compensation
  • JILL WALTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $465,995 total reported compensation
  • JASON BULL (CIO): $451,831 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 mission and purpose of the University of Georgia Foundation is to provide support for the teaching, research, public service and outreach programs of the University of Georgia by means of volunteer leadership and assistance in development and fundraising activities; fiduciary care for the assets of the foundation for the long-term benefit and enhancement of the university; and broad advice, consultation and support to the president of the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

The university of Georgia foundation ("the foundation") was chartered in 1937 to establish and maintain endowments for the support of the academic programs of the university of Georgia. The foundation manages funds established with the foundation in accordance with the instructions of the donor and provides financial support upon request to the university of Georgia for scholarships, faculty salary supplement, awards and lectureships and operating programs involving fundraising and constituent relations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as 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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 92
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.4%; rating input score 97; 53rd 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: 35.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.17; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 91.8% of revenue deployed · 94.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 38 of 39 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $200.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 42 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.