IU Hillel
Legal name: Hillel Foundation at Indiana University Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202804389
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bloomington, IN, United States
- Phone
- 8123363824
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,093,351
- Expenses
- $1,085,432
- Assets
- $2,371,310
- Liabilities
- $294,178
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL MERVIS (President)
- LAURENCE BOLOTIN (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jeffrey Linkon (Executive Dir.): $115,097 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Since 1938, IU Hillel has been a vibrant home for Jewish students where community, tradition, and connection thrive. We foster a warm, inclusive environment where students celebrate Jewish life, explore their identities, and form lifelong friendships. With deep respect for the diversity of IU’s Jewish student body, we remain committed to nurturing Jewish continuity both on campus and beyond.
What it reported doing in 2024
Relgious/social/cultural (high holidays, passover, and weekly shabbat services): by offering services and kosher meals during high holidays, passover, and weekly shabbat services, iu hillel is providing religious and social experiences for all who attend (jewish and nonjewish members of the student body and the community). Religious services and the homestyle dining offered provide a "jewish home away from home" for the students. Because people who are not jewish sometimes attend shabbat services, hillel uses this opportunity to showjewish culture and educate the public about judaism.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.3%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 52
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.18; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 53.3% of revenue deployed · 52.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $567K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.