University of Missouri College of Engineering Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271679425
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Columbia, MO, USA
Phone
4055148609
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$105,337
Expenses
$74,882
Assets
$219,125
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WARD A CHAMBERS MD (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WARD A CHAMBERS MD (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM DECKER (VICE PRESIDE)
  • SUSAN L PASTERNACK (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The umcoe foundation provides gap-filling resources to help mizzou's college of engineering continue its quest for excellence in meeting current and future challenges during a period when state budgets have been drastically restricted for higher education. Our alumni and friends of the college have provided valuable support for these objectives. Mizzou's college of engineering has attracted faculty, staff and students who are nationally and internationally recognized. Faculty and staff have achieved teaching excellence awards from the university and they have conducted state and nationally funded research. Undergraduate and graduate students enroll with exceptional credentials involved in research and student programs year-round. The foundation supports these faculty, staff, and students by the following: - providing facility and departmental support. - establishing and funding student scholarships. - providing funds for recognition of superior researchers or teachers (faculty, student

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation has provided over 500,000 during its 14-year existence to directly support mizzou engineering students. In 2024, donor-designated student scholarship contributions were transferred to the engineering school ranging from 75 to 25,000. In addition, the board made a grant of 6,634 to match student clubs fundraising during mizzou gives days. Three large designated donations were transferred for scholarships of 2,500 center for energy innovation, 5,000 mary carlson endowment, and 25,000 baker construction project management program. From the foundation's 2010 inception to year-end 2024, 515,292 in restricted or designated donations in this category have been received and have been transferred to the college. The majority of these designated donations go towards specific scholarships, but also includes a scholarship fundraising campaign by the foundation in 2012 which raised almost 32,000. Matching funds received from donors' employers are restricted to the same designation as the donor specified.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 63.3%; rating input score 63; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -65.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.3% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.