William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383048086
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7346157582
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,209,136
Expenses
$5,264,582
Assets
$59,551,487
Liabilities
$749,032

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Paul Clyde (President Part Year)
  • Wendy Taylor (President Part Year)

Highest reported compensation

  • Amy Gillett (VP Education Secretary): $338,604 total reported compensation
  • Pascale Leroueil (VP Healthcare): $309,986 total reported compensation
  • Paul Clyde (President Part Year): $303,262 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 William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan is an independent education research and applied practice organization. The Institute provides instruction and works with businesses universities development organizations and governments to equip decision-makers in emerging markets with the tools of commercial success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research - The Institute performed research to act as a bridge between academics and practitioners in the areas of: Healthcare business approaches to improve healthcare delivery in emerging markets and supply chain management; Impact Measurement the design and implementation of customized assessment solutions to understand the economic social and environmental performance and outcomes of organizations and businesses operating in emerging markets; and Energy identifies individuals communities and companies developing innovative approaches to generating power and connect them with the expertise knowledge and tools to build profitable enterprises.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 36th 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; 63rd 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: 27%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.31; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59% of revenue deployed · 59% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 46 of 46 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.