Ivy League Educational and Charities Foundation
Legal name: Ivy League Educational & Charities Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 161629247
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Houston, TX, US
- Phone
- 7135036410
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,006
- Expenses
- $70,710
- Assets
- $164,221
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
People named in this filing
- Karen Baker Sonier (Chair)
- Victoria McLain (Vice Chair)
- Angela Brooks (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the Ivy League Educational and Charities Foundation (ILECF) is to promote life-long learning. This is accomplished by securing charitable contributions, gifts and endowed funds to awards scholarships, fellowships and grants.
What it reported doing in 2025
$1000 Scholarships to Rodney Stevenson, Erianna Bolton, Tayl0r Nguyen, Luke Castro, Davida Adeniruju, Patrick Spiller, David Diaz, Ajani Davis, Jeanna Goedeken, MarJaee Williams Jack, Meleah Chapman, Sydney Robertson, Addison Morton Madison Matthews, Reese Sterling, Janae Jerome, Reagan Wilson, Anna Nguyen, Caeden Young, Ashley Charles, MaKenzi Henderson, Camille Boughton, $1250 to Dylan Lemond, $1500 to Kyla Cole, Clarissa Parker
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 program spending has grown recently. 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: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.3%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 1
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.32; rating input score 69; 69th 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 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th 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: 1.3% of revenue deployed · 1.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $924 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 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 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.