Lake Geauga Educational Assistance Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341640416
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Kirtland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 4405257095
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Student Services, Organizations of Students
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $643,124
- Expenses
- $509,310
- Assets
- $486,041
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PATRICIA G EGAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MEGAN KRIPPEL (PRESIDENT)
- BRANDON ROBINSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- PATRICIA G EGAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $84,105 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Leaf empowers learners to plan for their future through career, education, and financial aid advisory services.
What it reported doing in 2024
Leaf serves 24 schools (16,000+) students in lake, geauga, cuyahoga, and portage counties. Advisory services include: career exploration; college/career technical education program search; understanding the college admission process; fee waivers for admission applications and sats/acts; understanding the financial aid process; filing the fafsa form; completion of other financial aid documents, such as the ccs profile, institutional forms, and change of circumstance forms; scholarship search; understanding education funding options, including student loans; interpreting financial aid offers. Leaf also publishes the resource guide for pathway success; junior, senior, and career leaflets; and 16 e-newsletters that are grade specific. Publications are directed to contract school constituencies only. Advisors meet individual students and families at the high school, virtually, or at the resource center. They also facilitate in-school presentations, a financial aid night, and often a financial aid filing night, which assists in filing the fafsa form.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 73.9%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 20.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 73.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $377K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 59/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.