Harvard Community Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364125856
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Harvard, IL, USA
Phone
8157191825
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,479
Expenses
$137,566
Assets
$2,787,291
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Berg (Vice President)
  • Matt Young (President)

People named in this filing

  • Melissa Berg (Vice President)
  • Matt Young (President)
  • Mary Cooke (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

Innovate projects through grants that support curriculum based programs and go above and beyond normal educational requirements.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Duo Program is an early college program that was created through a collaboration partnership between McHenry County College and Harvard Community Unit School District 50. The program provides academically motivated students enrolled in Harvard School District 50 an opportunity to earn a high school diploma and associate of arts degree simultaneously. During student's final two years of high school, students will take a combination of dual credit courses offed through District 50 at Harvard High School and McHenry County College at McHenry County College Campus.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.6%; rating input score 95; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 43%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.26; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $93K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 51/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.