International Collegiate Licensing Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010692354
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Westlake, OH, USA
Phone
4408924000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$513,516
Expenses
$380,407
Assets
$1,223,199
Liabilities
$950

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMBERLY SPINO (PRESIDENT)
  • SHELLY TERRY (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD FAIRCHILD (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERIKA AUSTIN (THIRD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICK A MANAK (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • KIMBERLY SPINO (PRESIDENT)
  • SHELLY TERRY (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD FAIRCHILD (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

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

The mission of the international collegiate licensing association is to foster the highest possible professional and ethical standards while providing collegiate licensing practitioners a broad range of professional advancement opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mentorship program: the goal of the program is to offer icla members an additional professional development opportunity through a formal program specific to the collegiate licensing industry. Each candidate (mentee) selected to participate in the program will be paired with two mentors (one institutional member and one affiliate member) who will be charged with sharing their experiences and helping the mentee develop relationships that will increase their understanding of the industry beyond sharing policies and procedures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 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: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.8%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.9%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.22; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.8% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $279K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.