Yale University

“There are two ex-officio trustees, the governor of connecticut and the lieutenant governor of connecticut. Historically, these individuals do not participate in governance activities at the university and they are reported as independent.”

“CATHARINE B. HILL AND PAUL L. JOSKOW - Business relationship, E. John Rice, Jr. and Michael Warren - Business relationship”

“The governing body includes six alumni trustees who are elected by the alumni.”

“THE FORM 990 WAS REVIEWED BY SENIOR MANAGEMENT. IN ADDITION, THE UNIVERSITY DISTRIBUTED A DRAFT COPY OF FORM 990 TO THE CORPORATION AUDIT COMMITTEE, COMPRISED OF four MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY'S GOVERNING BODY. MEMBERS OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT MET WITH CERTAIN UNIVERSITY OFFICERS AND THE CORPORATION AUDIT COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS THE DRAFT FORM 990 AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PRIOR TO FILING.”

“The yale university conflict of interest policy obligates each officer, trustee, and key employee to promptly disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest as defined in the policy. Each such person must sign a statement annually affirming that he or she has received a copy of the conflict of interest policy, has read and understands the policy, agrees to comply with the policy, and understands that the corporation is charitable and in order to maintain its exemption it must engage primarily in activities which accomplish one or more of its tax-exempt purposes. In connection with any actual or possible conflict of interest, an interested person must disclose the existence of his or her financial interest and be given the opportunity to disclose all material facts to the director and members of the committee with governing board delegated powers considering the proposed transaction or arrangement. After disclosure of a potential conflict of interest, the interested person is excused from the governing board or committee meeting while the determination of a conflict of interest is made, and is recused from participating in any vote on the matter.”

“The process for determining the compensation of the president included initial review by the committee on compensation (the compensation committee) of the yale corporation (yale university's governing board), a recommendation voted by the committee to the yale corporation, and full review and vote by the yale corporation. Both reviews included review of the compensation of similarly qualified individuals in comparable positions at other universities, as compiled by a professional compensation consultant retained by the compensation committee for the purpose, and review of information on such comparable positions from irs forms 990 for similar organizations; both reviews considered such data in light of the performance of the president, which was reviewed by the compensation committee and by the yale corporation. The proceedings of the compensation committee, and the proceedings of the yale corporation, each were documented in minutes of the respective body, contemporaneously adopted and retained in the records of the respective body, along with the data on comparable compensation that was relied upon.”

“The process for determining compensation of the officers consisted of review by the compensation committee of the recommendations made by the president, considering the performance of each officer, and review of data on compensation of similarly qualified individuals in comparable positions at similar organizations, as collected by a professional compensation consultant through surveys; the compensation committee voted recommendations on compensation of such individuals to the yale corporation. The yale corporation received the recommendations of the compensation committee, and discussed these with the president, who reviewed the performance of each officer with the yale corporation, and also the comparable compensation information. The yale corporation then voted on the compensation of each officer. The proceedings of the compensation committee and of the corporation each were documented in minutes contemporaneously adopted and retained in the records of the respective body, along with the data on comparable compensation that was relied upon. Of the key employees, the compensation of the dean, school of medicine was recommended by the president to the compensation committee, and reviewed by that committee in conjunction with its review of the performance of the dean and consideration of data on the compensation of similarly qualified individuals in comparable positions at other institutions compiled by an independent compensation consultant. The compensation committee voted to approve the compensation, and contemporaneously documented its proceedings in minutes retained in its records along with the compensation data relied upon. With respect to the chief investment officer and senior director, investments, the compensation committee voted to approve the compensation after consideration of the recommendations of the president and of the following: review of the performance of each, investment performance of the yale endowment over designated periods, other performance-related information, and an analysis of the compensation of similarly qualified individuals in comparable positions at taxable and tax-exempt organizations prepared by an independent compensation consultant retained for the purpose. The compensation committee contemporaneously documented its proceedings in minutes retained in its records along with the compensation data relied upon. No member of the yale corporation who had a conflict of interest with respect to a compensation arrangement described above (i.e., by virtue of a family or business relationship) participated in the compensation committee review or the vote of the yale corporation with respect to such compensation arrangement.”

“The university's governing documents, including any amendments, financial statements and standards of business conduct are available on the university's website or upon request.”

“COMPENSATION FOR THE FORMER OFFICER INCLUDES AMOUNTS RELATED TO SERVICE IN AN OFFICER POSITION THROUGH 6/30/18 and compensation related to continuing service in a non-officer position through 12/31/18.”

“The number of hours reported for each listed person is an estimate. The estimate for trustees includes meeting time and preparation, as well as attendance at certain official university functions during the year, but does not include travel time or attendance at other events as trustees. In many cases, the actual average hours per week for listed persons, other than trustees, exceeded 50 hours.”

“PETER SALOVEY: PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY Alexander E. Dreier: General Counsel & Sr Counselor to the President PERICLES LEWIS: Vice PROVOST FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS; professor of comparative literature BENJAMIN POLAK: PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS; PROFESSOR, SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT SCOTT A. STROBEL: vice PROVOST FOR TEACHING & LEARNING; PROFESSOR OF MOLECULAR BIOPHYSICS AND BIOCHEMISTRY; PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY; HOWARD HUGHES MEDICAL INSTITUTE PROFESSOR ROBERT J. ALPERN: PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE (NEPHROLOGY) KHALID M. ABBED: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF NEUROSURGERY; DIRECTOR, MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINE SURGERY; Director, SPINE TUMOR SURGERY Murat Gunel: Professor of Neurosurgery and Professor of Genetics and of Neuroscience Charles C. Matouk: Associate Professor of Neurosurgery; Director, Neurovascular/Endovascular Fellowship BRUCE D. ALEXANDER: SR Advisor New Haven Affairs”

“Misc 1 - Total Revenue: 11137956, Related or Exempt Function Revenue: 8895440, Unrelated Business Revenue: 2242516, Revenue Excluded from Tax Under Sections 512, 513, or 514: ; Misc 2 - Total Revenue: 11137956, Related or Exempt Function Revenue: 11137956, Unrelated Business Revenue: , Revenue Excluded from Tax Under Sections 512, 513, or 514: ; Misc 3 - Total Revenue: 11137956, Related or Exempt Function Revenue: 11137956, Unrelated Business Revenue: , Revenue Excluded from Tax Under Sections 512, 513, or 514: ; Misc 4 - Total Revenue: 11137956, Related or Exempt Function Revenue: 11137956, Unrelated Business Revenue: , Revenue Excluded from Tax Under Sections 512, 513, or 514: ; Misc 5 - Total Revenue: 11137956, Related or Exempt Function Revenue: 11137956, Unrelated Business Revenue: , Revenue Excluded from Tax Under Sections 512, 513, or 514: ;”

“THE AMOUNT REPORTED REPRESENTS DIRECT CASH PAYMENTS MADE DURING THE CALENDAR YEAR 2018 TO INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS FOR SERVICES. FOR CONSTRUCTION and related SERVICES, THE FEES REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CONTRACT COST.”

“Volunteers support and benefit the university in a wide variety of activities, programs, and services. While yale university does not track the number of its volunteers, the university estimates that the number of volunteers was approximately 9,600 during fye 6/30/19.”

“Yale is committed to improving the world today and for future generations through outstanding research and scholarship, education, preservation, and practice. Yale educates aspiring leaders worldwide who serve all sectors of society. We carry out this mission through the free exchange of ideas in an ethical, interdependent, and diverse community of faculty, staff, students, and alumni.”

“(Expenses $ 502,545,464 including grants of $ 6,609,629)(Revenue $ 84,795,227) OTHER PROGRAM SERVICES INCLUDE ACADEMIC SUPPORT, PUBLIC SERVICE, AND OTHER INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT.”

“Other expenses include $1,589,366 of state unrelated business income tax.”

“Change in funding status of defined benefit plans - -XXX-XX-XXXX; Actuarial adjustments for split interest liability - 2736712;”

“WITH RESPECT TO SPONSORED PROJECT ACTIVITY SUBCONTRACTED TO OTHER ENTITIES, THE UNIVERSITY'S POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR MONITORING SUB RECIPIENT AWARDS ("SUBaWARDS") ARE INTENDED TO ESTABLISH APPROPRIATE AND EFFECTIVE MECHANISMS TO PROMOTE COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS, INCLUDING THE PROPER MONITORING AND STEWARDSHIP OF AWARDED FUNDS. PROPER MONITORING OF A SUBAWARD ENSURES THAT AWARDED FUNDS ARE USED FOR AUTHORIZED PURPOSES, PERFORMANCE GOALS ARE MET AND THE SUB RECIPIENT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT. SUB RECIPIENT MONITORING PROCEDURES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES: A FORMAL PRE-QUALIFICATION PROCESS FOR SUB RECIPIENTS, PRE-AWARD AND POST-AWARD MONITORING OF SUB RECIPIENTS TO REVIEW THE FINANCIAL STATUS AND MANAGEMENT CONTROLS, COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATIONS, REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS RELATIVE TO THE USE OF HUMAN SUBJECTS AND ANIMALS, IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING OF ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH A SUB RECIPIENT ENTITY, AND A REVIEW OF PERTINENT OTHER ORGANIZATION INFORMATION. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PROCEDURES, THE UNIVERSITY REVIEWS THE SUB RECIPIENT'S ADMINISTRATION, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, BILLINGS, SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS, TECHNICAL REPORTS, AND DELIVERABLES OF AN ACTIVE SUBAWARD REGULARLY AND CONDUCTS ON-GOING RISK ASSESSMENTS AS WELL AS QUARTERLY QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEWS ON RANDOMLY SELECTED SUBAWARDS. IN ADDITION TO A MONTHLY DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW, THE UNIVERSITY MONITORS A SUB RECIPIENT'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SUBAWARD ANNUALLY AND UPON CLOSEOUT OF THE SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT. IF ANY OF THESE MONITORING PROCEDURES RESULT IN FINDINGS, THE UNIVERSITY WILL TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION AS NECESSARY. THE PROCEDURES SERVE TO ENSURE THAT THE SUBAWARD FUNDS ARE USED FOR PROPER PURPOSES AND NOT DIVERTED FROM THEIR INTENDED USE.”

“A portion of this contribution represents a pledge. It is unknown at this time whether the pledge will be satisfied with cash or non-cash property.”