The Hun School of Princeton

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
210639868
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Princeton, NJ, USA
Phone
(609) 921-7600
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,244,126
Expenses
$46,541,780
Assets
$100,146,403
Liabilities
$38,270,809

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN MCGLORY MICHEL (CHAIR/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTIAN B BRONK (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $799,575 total reported compensation
  • STEFANIE J CONNELL (CHIEF FINANCIAL & OPERATIONS OFFICER): $359,432 total reported compensation
  • RYAN K HEWS (HEAD OF UPPER SCHOOL): $240,692 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Hun School of Princeton is a private, coeducational college preparatory school for boarding and day students in grades 6 through 12, dedicated to fostering academic excellence, leadership, and global citizenship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided day and residential secondary education for grades six through twelve, including a post-graduate year, for 690 students. In addition, provided a six-week day summer program for over 500 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 7.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $800K · 26 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.9M reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.