Strong and consistent growth in assets over the past decade, from $593M in 2014 to $994M in 2023.
Healthy financial surpluses in most reported periods, contributing to asset growth.
Liabilities appear manageable relative to growing assets.
Spending Breakdown
How Long Island University allocates its funds across programs, administration, and fundraising.
75%
Program Spending
Healthy — majority goes to mission
15%
Admin Costs
Reasonable — admin costs in check
10%
Fundraising
Within typical range
How to read this: Well-run charities typically spend 75% or more on programs, keep admin under 25%, and fundraising under 15%. A high program ratio means more of every dollar goes directly to the mission.
How to Interpret This Report
What Red Flags Mean
Red flags are potential warning signs identified by AI analysis of IRS 990 filings. They may indicate issues like declining revenue, high executive pay relative to program spending, lack of transparency, or governance concerns. A single red flag does not necessarily mean an organization is untrustworthy, but multiple flags warrant further investigation before donating.
What Mission Score Measures
The Mission Score (0-100) evaluates how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated purpose. It combines multiple factors: program spending efficiency (how much goes to programs vs. overhead), financial health and sustainability, governance quality, transparency in reporting, and consistency of operations over time. A score of 70+ indicates strong alignment with the organization’s mission.
Using This Data for Donation Decisions
Use this report as one input in your decision. Look at the overall Mission Score for a quick assessment, review red flags and strengths for specific concerns, check the spending breakdown to see where money goes, and compare executive compensation to the organization’s size. Consider viewing the full transparency report for deeper analysis, and always verify tax-exempt status with the IRS before making large donations.
Frequently Asked Questions about Long Island University
Is Long Island University a legitimate charity?
Based on AI analysis of IRS 990 filings, Long Island University (EIN: 111633516) appears trustworthy. Mission Score: 70/100. 2 red flags identified, 4 strengths noted.
Is Long Island University a good charity to donate to?
Long Island University has a Mission Score of 70/100. Revenue: $509.5M. Assets: $1.1B. Review the full transparency report for detailed spending breakdown and executive compensation analysis.
What is the EIN for Long Island University?
The Employer Identification Number (EIN) for Long Island University is 111633516. This is the unique tax ID assigned by the IRS.
What is a Mission Score?
The Mission Score is a 0-100 rating that measures how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated mission. It factors in program spending efficiency, financial transparency, governance practices, and outcome reporting. Scores above 70 indicate strong mission alignment, 40-69 suggest mixed performance, and below 40 signals potential concerns.
How does Long Island University spend its money?
Long Island University allocates 75% to programs, 15% to administration, and 10% to fundraising. Healthy nonprofits typically spend 75%+ on programs.
How can I verify Long Island University's tax-exempt status?
You can verify Long Island University's tax-exempt status using EIN 111633516 on the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search (TEOS) at apps.irs.gov/app/eos. You can also request copies of their Form 990 directly from the organization, as they are required by law to provide them upon request.
AI Transparency Report
Long Island University demonstrates a generally stable financial position with consistent revenue streams exceeding expenses over the past several years. For instance, in the 202308 period, revenue was $438,580,813 against expenses of $406,469,116, indicating a surplus. The organization's assets have also shown steady growth, increasing from $593,150,804 in 201408 to $994,068,493 in 202308, suggesting prudent financial management and investment. Liabilities have remained relatively stable or decreased as a proportion of assets, further strengthening its balance sheet.
While the provided data indicates a healthy financial trajectory, the absence of detailed expense breakdowns (program, administrative, fundraising) in the summary makes it challenging to fully assess spending efficiency and program focus. The consistent reporting of 0% for officer compensation across all periods is unusual for an organization of this size and could indicate that executive compensation is reported under other expense categories or that the data provided is incomplete regarding this specific metric. This lack of clarity on compensation and detailed spending categories limits a comprehensive assessment of its operational efficiency and transparency.
Overall, the university appears financially sound with growing assets and consistent revenue generation. However, a more granular breakdown of expenses and clarification on executive compensation reporting would enhance transparency and allow for a more precise evaluation of its spending efficiency and commitment to its mission.