Paul Smith's College

Legal name: Paul Smiths College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
150533545
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Paul Smiths, NY, USA
Phone
888-873-6570
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$41,833,900
Expenses
$43,044,858
Assets
$73,873,273
Liabilities
$14,266,517

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR DANIEL KELTING (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR DANIEL KELTING (PRESIDENT/CE): $238,639 total reported compensation
  • KATHY BONAVIST (VP ENROLLMEN): $175,903 total reported compensation
  • JOHN BRADLEY (DIRECTOR OF): $160,477 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Paul Smith's College provides hands-on learning and real-world experience in the Adirondacks, preparing students for careers in fields like forestry, hospitality, and environmental science.

What it reported doing in 2024

Postsecondary education, general/other: instruction - to provide higher education to men and women in the arts and sciences, with authority to confer the degrees of associates in arts (aa), associates in applied science (aas) and bachelor of science (bs) in conformity with the regents of nys and the commissioner of education. Approximately 600 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% 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 71% for direct work, and 29% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 27th 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: -2.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.72; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $41.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $239K · 31 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.1M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 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: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.