Ivy Leaf Assn Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
230727300
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Reading, PA, USA
Phone
6103726323
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,911
Expenses
$70,743
Assets
$140,742
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Stufflet (President)
  • Selisa Robins (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Keith Reyes (Head Trustee): $200 total reported compensation
  • Johnny Oyola (Trustee): $200 total reported compensation
  • Steve E Ahrens (Trustee): $200 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 purpose for which the corporation is formed is for the raising of a fund for the payment of death benefits to a class of members to be designated by the by-laws as Beneficial members, said payments to be made to the beneficiary or beneficiaries so designated by the deceased Beneficial member in writing; to assist in defraying the funeral expenses of said deceased Beneficial members, who have complied with the rules, regulations and by-laws of the Association, said benefit or donation to be in an amount to be fixed by the by-laws or the Association; and to conduct a club for the purpose of providing for the refreshment, entertainment and social diversion of its members; and for these purposes; to have, possess and enjoy all the rights, benefits and privileges of the said Act of Assembly and its supplements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.5%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: Filed program service accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.