Duke University
Overview
Mission
To provide a superior liberal education, to prepare future members of learned professions, to advance the frontiers of knowledge, and to help those who suffer, cure disease, and promote health. Duke’s story is being written every day. It’s shaped by bold ideas and a shared commitment to progress. Help write our next chapter. Explore Duke Facts. Explore the policies that support a respectful, inclusive, and productive work culture. An aerial view of West Campus surrounded by green trees with mountains in the distance Previous Features. Financial Support At Duke, we do more than offer financial aid. We offer support. Our goal is to ensure that students have the resources to attend and thrive-from application to graduation and all the experiences in between. Financial Support.
What it reported doing in 2024
Duke university engages in world-renowned research worksponsored by numerous federal, state, local agencies, and private grants
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 87% 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.
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 560532129
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2013
- Headquarters
- Durham, NC, United States
- Phone
- 9196842006
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.2%; rating input score 98
- Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.9%; rating input score 92; 39th 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: 8.5%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.09; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 98.2% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 34 of 37 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.9B in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $5M · 57 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $97.6M reported
- Consistency: 47 of 48 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 annual filings from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 136 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 168 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.
Leadership & pay
57 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- NEAL F TRIPLETT (CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER): $5,012,725 total reported compensation
- MANUEL DIAZ (COACH): $4,291,195 total reported compensation
- JONATHAN COOK MD (PHYSICIAN): $3,376,664 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: FY2024.