D'Youville University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
160743989
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Buffalo, NY, USA
Phone
716-829-8000
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$99,530,818
Expenses
$109,975,424
Assets
$259,096,104
Liabilities
$112,904,593

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR LORRIE CLEMO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR LORRIE CLEMO (PRESIDENT): $452,587 total reported compensation
  • SHAWN CANNON (DEAN OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE): $321,760 total reported compensation
  • NICHOLAS CAMPOSEO (ASSOC DEAN CLINICAL MED EDUCATION): $317,648 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

D'Youville students will gain knowledge of human cultures and the physical and natural world through study in the sciences and mathematics, social sciences, humanities, histories, languages, and the arts as well as through integrative and applied learning including synthesis and advanced accomplishment across general-education and specialized studies.

What it reported doing in 2024

D'youville university is a private university in buffalo, New York offering undergraduate, graduate, doctoral and continuing education programs primarily in health sciences, liberal arts and business. The university teaches its students to contribute to the world community by becoming leaders in their academic fields of study. The university is primarily funded by the tuition and fees charged for programs offered for approximately 2,600 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% 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 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 45th 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: Fail
    • 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: -10.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.36; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 97% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $100M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $453K · 22 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $16.2M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.