Colgate University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 150532078
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Hamilton, NY, USA
- Phone
- 3152287422
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Undergraduate College (4-year)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $490,649,347
- Expenses
- $354,157,987
- Assets
- $2,305,580,517
- Liabilities
- $484,585,324
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
50 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRIAN W CASEY (PRESIDENT)
- CHRISTOPHER WELLS (VICE PRESIDENT ADMINISTRATION)
Highest reported compensation
- BRIAN W CASEY (PRESIDENT): $1,420,097 total reported compensation
- JOSEPH S HOPE (SR. VP-FIN, CIO, TREASURER): $955,502 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW LANGEL (HEAD COACH MENS BASKETBALL): $822,454 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Colgate's mission is to provide a demanding, expansive, educational experience to a select group of diverse, talented, intellectually sophisticated students who are capable of challenging themselves, their peers, and their teachers in a setting that brings together living and learning. The purpose of the university is to develop wise, thoughtful, critical thinkers and perceptive leaders by challenging students to fulfill their potential through residence in a community that values intellectual rigor and respects the complexity of human understanding.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide a world-class and demanding undergraduate educational experience for a talented and diverse group of approximately 3,000 students. The purpose is to develop wise, thoughtful, critical thinkers and perceptive leaders by encouraging young men and women to fulfill their potential through residence in a community that values all forms of intellectual rigor and respects the complexity of human understanding.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 98
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Pass
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 52nd 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: 27.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.51; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 33 of 34 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $309.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 50 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $51.8M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 13 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 16 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.