University of Colorado Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 846049811
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Denver, CO, US
- Phone
- 303-541-1229
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $456,087,334
- Expenses
- $294,501,134
- Assets
- $3,549,699,710
- Liabilities
- $680,794,933
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JACK FINLAW (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- TODD SALIMAN (UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JACK FINLAW (PRESIDENT & CEO): $526,064 total reported compensation
- A KELLER YOUNG ESQ (SVP, GENERAL COUNSEL, CAO): $367,405 total reported compensation
- CHARLENE LAUS (VP & CFO): $339,767 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 University of Colorado Foundation is the portal for philanthropic giving to the University of Colorado and is responsible for receiving, managing and investing the endowments and other gift funds the Foundation holds for the benefit of CU.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule o.university of Colorado foundation's charitable mission is to receive and manage private gifts to benefit the university of Colorado. In accordance with this mission, the foundation receipted $301,813,626 in direct public support of the university for the fiscal year ended june 30, 2025. In addition, as of june 30, 2025 the foundation invested, accounted for, and managed $2,471,698,810 in net assets for the benefit of the university. The foundation directly applied and distributed monies to university of Colorado in the amount of $252,112,492. These applied and distributed monies were used by the university to provide scholarships, fellowships, fund lectureships and professorships, construct facilities, purchase equipment, provide loans, purchase educational and research materials and to fund a myriad of other projects and items to help the university provide education to the general public.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 97
- Sustainability: 89
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 47th 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: 35.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.05; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $230.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $526K · 28 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $12.5M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.