University of Arkansas – Fort Smith Foundation

Legal name: University of Ar Ft Smith Foundationinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237408227
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Fort Smith, AR, US
Phone
479-788-7000
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,429,145
Expenses
$10,507,943
Assets
$155,468,673
Liabilities
$479,787

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BLAKE RICKMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR TERISA RILEY (CHANCELLOR UAFS): $387,648 total reported compensation
  • BLAKE RICKMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $235,428 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 University of Arkansas – Fort Smith Foundation, Inc. supports the mission of the University of Arkansas – Fort Smith by securing and managing private gifts to provide scholarships, enhance academic programs, and improve campus facilities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Academic support that includes $6,242,258 for faculty professorships and chairs, sponsorship of various cultural events, and support of maymester programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% 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 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th 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; 72nd 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; 66th 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: 8.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.8; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 94.2% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $388K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $215K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.