University of Montana Foundation
Legal name: The University of Montana Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810362989
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Missoula, MT, USA
- Phone
- (800) 443-2593
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $58,672,838
- Expenses
- $54,202,004
- Assets
- $459,117,547
- Liabilities
- $55,991,891
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
39 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAMS CYNTHIA (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAMS CYNTHIA (PRESIDENT & CEO): $443,828 total reported compensation
- STANTON JAMIE (CHIEF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS OFFICER): $261,334 total reported compensation
- JENNINGS TRACEY (VP OF DEVELOPMENT): $201,314 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Together, we believe in the power of generous people to make a difference in the world. We believe philanthropy definitively shapes UM as a world-class institution that improves the life of every student.
What it reported doing in 2024
Every successful foundation relies on a strong framework to ensure donated funds are responsibly managed, programs run smoothly, and the mission remains sustainable for years to come. The um contract and administration fees deliver this critical support and plays a strategic role in advancing our mission.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 84% 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
STRONG - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 79.3%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.47; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 79.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $43M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $444K · 39 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.