Heritage University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911160585
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Toppenish, WA, USA
Phone
1-888-272-6190
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,985,331
Expenses
$34,788,759
Assets
$93,970,470
Liabilities
$12,521,417

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

Leadership & pay

39 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW SUND (HERITAGE PRESIDENT (THRU 6/25))

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW SUND (HERITAGE PRESIDENT (THRU 6/25)): $359,318 total reported compensation
  • DAVID WISE (VP OF ADVANCEMENT/MARKETING): $168,397 total reported compensation
  • COREY HODGE (VP OF STUDENT AFFAIRS): $167,585 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Heritage University empowers a multi-cultural and inclusive student body to overcome the social, cultural, economic, and geographic barriers that limit access to higher education.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. To provide classroom, faculty and services to all heritage students, predominantly minority undergraduate and graduate students, who are living in an isolated location at or below the federal poverty guidelines. 2. To provide students with services including financial aid assistance, counseling, internships, job placement, scholarships, and grants.3. Academic support including student support and access to learning resources, and record maintenance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% 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 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 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: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 30th 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: 24.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.7; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 52.3% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 29 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $359K · 39 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.