Friends of Links for Learning

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934669426
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Livingston, MT, USA
Phone
4063332382
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,917
Expenses
$47,980
Assets
$141,344
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG COLEMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW BLADES (BOARD MEMBER)
  • GREG COLEMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • SABRINA CREWE (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support links for learning and the children who benefit from its programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

Friends of links for learning is the supporting organization of links for learning. Links for learning is based in livingston public schools and offers out-of-school programs to children in park county, Montana. The programs provide homework and academic support, healthy snacks, outdoor play, a variety of engaging enrichment activities, and opportunities for community involvement. Friends of links for learning was founded in 2019 (under the fiscal sponsorship of the park county community foundation) in response to a reduction in federal grant funding for out-of-school programs. Its mission is to support the long-term sustainability of links for learning. Friends of links reorganized in 2023 and achieved tax-exempt status in 2024. We raise funds to support existing programs and activities of links for learning. We are also working on expanding to meet the growing need of families in our community for out-of-school programs and to create a permanent home for links' programs. Friends of links for learning is committed to: providing affordable, high quality, after-school and summer activities, helping elevate academic performance and commitment to school, building and strengthening links between families, schools and the community, and empowering working families. During 2024, we continued to re-build our board of directors, raise money for links' programs and future, and re-aligned our mission with our supported organization. In 2025 we began a feasibility study to explore the possibility of a permanent home for links for learning, specifically rehabing Washington school. We continued to work on securing board members and fundraising for links programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.95; rating input score 43; 43rd 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 149.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 67.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 86.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.