Evan Oglesby Charitable Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 263858105
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 2566481766
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $41,704
- Expenses
- $30,291
- Assets
- $46,234
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EVAN OGLESBY (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- EVAN OGLESBY (PRESIDENT)
- JIPIKA OGLESBY (SECRETARY)
- TIM ESCOTT (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Teaching character building through sports to empower and strengthen youth in achieving excellence in education and athletics.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Pro-Mingle Golf Social Fundraisers brought together business professionals, athletes, community leaders, and influencers for golf, networking, and community engagement. The event raised funds and increased awareness to support the organization's mission while strengthening partnerships and expanding its base of community supporters.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 54.7%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 27.4%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 54.7% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.