Mickey Hammerman Legacy Fund Inc C/o Lori Fogelson

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921290895
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3129095400
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,592
Expenses
$13,452
Assets
$332,807
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN BAIRD (PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN)
  • JULIE PALMER (VICE PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)
  • BLASKO RISTIC (VICE PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • STEPHEN BAIRD (PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN)
  • JULIE PALMER (VICE PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)
  • BLASKO RISTIC (VICE PRESIDENT 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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Activities include the organizing and presentation of lectures on education by acknowledged experts in the field and support for the activities of the harvard club of chicago and harvard university, both tax exempt organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The fund honors mickey hammerman's devotion to education and his lifelong goal of ensuring that applicants from Illinois and northern Indiana (the chicago region) receive personal college interviews. To that end, the hammerman fund hosts annual events devoted to education. Each of these events focus on two things.first, the events include speakers on important issues in education, with a focus on early childhood education when possible. In 2023, more than 80 attendees heard howard gardner's talk. (howard earl gardner is an american developmental psychologist and the john h. And elisabeth a. Hobbs research professor of cognition and education at harvard university.)second, the events honor and inspire harvard alumni to volunteer as interviewers for high school applicants to harvard college, making it possible for applicants of all backgrounds to have personal interviews. This past year, inspired in part by the fund's event, more than 490 interviewers interviewed more than 1,000 students who applied to harvard college.it is expected that the fund will continue to provide benefits by educating lecture attendees and inspiring interviewer volunteers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.1%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 70.5%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.74; rating input score 84; 84th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.1% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.