King's College
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 240804602
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Wilkesbarre, PA, USA
- Phone
- 5702085900
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $95,731,184
- Expenses
- $101,809,672
- Assets
- $270,217,346
- Liabilities
- $65,711,738
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
53 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- REV THOMAS P LOONEY CSC (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOSEPH M EVAN (PROVOST/VP ACADEMIC AFFAIR): $266,888 total reported compensation
- CHRIS DEARTH (VP ENROLLMENT MGMT AND MARKETING): $250,424 total reported compensation
- JANET KOBYLSKI (VP BUSINESS AFFAIRS/CFO/TREASURER): $237,534 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
King's College, grounded in the Holy Cross tradition, provides a transformative Catholic liberal arts education that fosters academic excellence, service learning, and personal growth, preparing students to become agents for change who serve the common good.
What it reported doing in 2024
King's college is a not-for-profit educational institution which provides undergraduate, graduate, and professional education to its students. The college was founded in 1946 and welcomes students into its community without regard to gender, race, religion, disability, or national origin and seeks to assist talented students of modest financial means.the college has approximately 1,940 students, of which 1,470 are full-time undergraduates. Approximately 92% of the college's present full-time undergraduate student body is comprised of residents from Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey.continued on schedule o.during the year ended june 30, 2025, the college provided student financial aid from internal resources of $37,595,000.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 84% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 34th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: -6.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.65; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd 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: 90% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 39 of 39 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $91.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 53 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.6M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 13 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: 10 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.