Licensing International Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814406324
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6467443741
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$191,467
Expenses
$193,012
Assets
$334,173
Liabilities
$62,616

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAURA REGAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TED LARKINS (DIRECTOR)
  • ERIC MORSE (DIRECTOR)
  • MACA ROTTER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of licensing international foundation, inc. Is to support and nurture the current generation interested in pursuing education in fields of study aligned with or supportive of brand licensing by providing financial assistance in the form of scholarships and encouragement in the form of mentorship to these individuals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Licensing international scholarship program awards scholarships for amounts between $2,500 and $15,000 (or local equivalent) to deserving individuals who are interested in a career in brand licensing seeking education in business, e-commerce, marketing, design, engineering, entrepreneurial studies and other brand licensing industry-related programs. The organization also partners with other organizations to help expand the reach of scholarships awarded. For 2024, there were fifteen (15) individual recipients of scholarships and two (2) 501(c)(3) partners awarded grants for scholarships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98%; rating input score 98; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $156K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.