The College Foundation at Delhi

Legal name: College Foundation at Delhi Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
166064771
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Delhi, NY, USA
Phone
6077464607
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,660,935
Expenses
$1,565,400
Assets
$20,312,588
Liabilities
$400,739

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES LEFKOWITZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD HAYES (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL T SULLIVAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL T SULLIVAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $215,436 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission is to: Accept, encourage and receive gifts of funds and real property and to apply the whole or any part of the income from the principal exclusively for charitable and/or educational purposes; Make grants of financial assistance to SUNY Delhi students;.

What it reported doing in 2024

Golf course: the foundation operates a golf course as an educational laboratory. The program provides students with training in golf course construction, operations, turf, and horticultural programs. In november 2021, the operations of the golf course were transferred to suny delhi. The foundations now rents the golf course to the college.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.9%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $134.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • 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: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.98; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 60.9% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.