University of Richmond

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540505965
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8042898150
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$535,402,202
Expenses
$510,068,329
Assets
$4,061,013,025
Liabilities
$399,989,355

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

Leadership & pay

43 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM MCLEAN (PRESIDENT AND CIO, SMC)
  • KEVIN HALLOCK (PRESIDENT AND TRUSTEE)
  • RONALD CRUTCHER (FORMER PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM MCLEAN (PRESIDENT AND CIO, SMC): $2,867,853 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN HALLOCK (PRESIDENT AND TRUSTEE): $2,553,560 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER MOONEY (BASKETBALL COACH): $2,077,668 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 of the university of richmond is to educate in an academically challenging, intellectually vibrant, and collaborative community dedicated to the holistic development of students and the production of scholarly and creative work. A richmond education prepares students for lives of purpose, thoughtful inquiry, and responsible leadership in a diverse world. The university of richmond's new strategic plan is intended to be brief, clear, and attainable, inspire our community, and guide our future direction. It centers around our "guiding lights": academic excellence, belonging & community, access & affordability, well-being, and experiential learning & community engagement. Utilizing this plan, we are currently aligning and streamlining efforts across our university. To view the plan in its entirety, please visit: https://strategicplan.richmond.edu/

What it reported doing in 2024

Academic support - the respective dean's offices of each of the five schools oversee the maintenance and development of the school to ensure that they maintain the high level of academic integrity that has become the standard of the university of richmond. The university offers opportunities for continuing education in each professor's specialty as well as in new teaching methods and technology, while faculty committees work toward continuous improvement in all areas of student instruction. Academic computing provides information technology to enhance the academic resources available to professors and students, and to the community through the university library. Lecture funds are set aside to pay for visiting speakers on topics relevant to academic studies offered.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 51st 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: 4.7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.96; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $419.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.9M · 43 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $25.9M reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.