University of South Carolina Business Partnership Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237042391
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, SC, USA
Phone
8037770233
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,296,737
Expenses
$15,554,873
Assets
$173,203,251
Liabilities
$946,834

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID PARKER (TREASURER/VICE PRESIDENT (NON VOTING))
  • JEAN E DUKE (SECRETARY/PRESIDENT (NONVOTING))
  • MARK CECCHINI (PRESIDENT - CORPORATE SOLUTIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID PARKER (TREASURER/VICE PRESIDENT (NON VOTING)): $227,448 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN COTTER (CHIEF EXTERNAL RELATIONS OFFICER): $218,196 total reported compensation
  • JEAN E DUKE (SECRETARY/PRESIDENT (NONVOTING)): $210,248 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build an endowment fund and supervise its creative management. To assist in determining appropriate projects and to be financed with funds raised. To encourage and assist in supporting research in business and economic problems. To assist in conducting conferences for education and development of management personnel worldwide.

What it reported doing in 2024

External relations: the foundation supports the darla moore school of business in conducting conferences, seminars, and management programs to further the education, development and effectiveness of business professionals and scholars worldwide. Engages alumni of the darla moore school of business through events, leadership recognition awards, and through the creation of a board of advisors to the foundation. External relations programs also focus on outreach to the business community to strengthen and expand partnerships for the benefit of the darla moore school of business through the board of trustees and board of advisors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% 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. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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: 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: 10.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.13; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $14.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $227K · 20 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $710K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.