Hilbert College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
166031585
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hamburg, NY, US
Phone
(716) 649-7900
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,649,000
Expenses
$34,264,114
Assets
$32,751,016
Liabilities
$13,870,221

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL S BROPHY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL S BROPHY (PRESIDENT): $417,367 total reported compensation
  • KRISTINE STILL (PROVOST): $243,616 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN CHRISTY (VP FOR INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT): $190,870 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Hilbert College is a Catholic college founded in the Franciscan tradition, dedicated to providing an inclusive, affordable education that prepares students for meaningful careers and lives of service.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hilbert college is a higher education institution offering baccalaureate degrees in 25 program areas and master degrees in two program areas. Student services provided include instruction, student finance, admissions, career development, mission integration, counseling, athletics, scholarships, financial aid, diversity and inclusion and student government. The college's engaging, student-centered campus community offers numerous leadership, internship, and service learning opportunities from which students launch successful careers while making a positive change in their communities. Hilbert college typically serves around 700 in person students, and approximately 250 online students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% 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 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 29th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $417K · 33 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $911K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.