Learning 4 Life Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933828499
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Bridgeport, WV, USA
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$195,502
Expenses
$31,967
Assets
$441,154

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charissa A Gregory (President Director Treasurer)
  • Benjamin M Blick (Vice President Director Secretary)

People named in this filing

  • Charissa A Gregory (President Director Treasurer)
  • Benjamin M Blick (Vice President Director Secretary)
  • Justin Smallridge (Director)

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

Learning 4 Life Foundation Inc. the Nonprofit seeks to empower the youth by encouraging them and helping them to develop important life skills educating them and introducing them to mentors who can kindle mentorship relationships and working professionals who can provide guidance to the youth on how to enter that arena of work accomplish their goals and develop leadership skills.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided children with vital holistic development by leveraging play-based learning to foster cognitive social emotional and physical skills through interactive environments. Promoted critical thinking creativity and self-regulation while boosting fine gross motor skills language development and resilience in a safe space to hundreds of children across 3 counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.2%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 55.2%; rating input score 55

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 83.6%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.8; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 9.2% of revenue deployed · 55.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $18K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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 9/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.