William & Mary Business School Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237079011
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Williamsburg, VA, USA
Phone
7572212294
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,950,934
Expenses
$6,160,562
Assets
$135,737,107
Liabilities
$191,038

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMBERLY SPERLING (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMBERLY SPERLING (CEO): $138,981 total reported compensation
  • CARLA R KING-JOHNSON (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $136,959 total reported compensation
  • KELLIE MINER-FRAZIER (ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $128,509 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 advance the goals of William & Mary's Raymond A. Mason School of Business through philanthropy by providing scholarships, programmatic and operational support, and support for its centers of excellence.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funding was provided to the Raymond A. Mason School of Business for operational support of its highly ranked undergraduate and graduate programs, provision of need-based and merit-based scholarships, support of faculty excellence and research projects, and funding of innovative student experiences including student investment projects, student research, corporate engagement projects, and other experiences to develop the application of business skills and equip students for lives of principled achievement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.4%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63.7%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.03; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.4% of revenue deployed · 57.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $139K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.