Evans Scholars Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 362518129
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Glenview, IL, USA
- Phone
- (847) 724-4600
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $117,552,012
- Expenses
- $57,336,019
- Assets
- $200,103,330
- Liabilities
- $9,724,564
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN M KACZKOWSKI (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- WILLIAM KINGORE (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN M KACZKOWSKI (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,187,779 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM KINGORE (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $968,243 total reported compensation
- STEVE BRUEGGEMAN (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $460,131 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Western Golf Association supports the Evans Scholars Foundation's efforts to award full tuition and housing college scholarships to hardworking caddies with limited financial means.
What it reported doing in 2025
The foundation provides scholarships and other educational opportunities for caddies and promotes the social and educational welfare of recipients. In 2025 there were approximately 1,250 recipients attending 27 universities receiving full tuition and housing. The awards are based on strong caddie record, excellent academics, demonstrated financial need, especially in the low- to moderate-income level and outstanding character. The cumulative grade point average of these recipients was 3.3. The graduation rate is 98%. There have been approximately 12,500 alumni of the program since inception in 1930. The revenues for these grants are mainly received from individual donors using an annual fund drive and personal solicitations for larger contributions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 96
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.1%; rating input score 35
- Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th 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: 51.2%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.49; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 35.1% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 26 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $872K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.