Road Forward Scholarship Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933317172
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Bridgehampton, NY, US
- Phone
- 2018386391
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $280,094
- Expenses
- $116,851
- Assets
- $418,970
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHERRI LIPPMAN (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- SHERRI LIPPMAN (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
- HOWARD LIPPMAN (TREASURER AND DIRECTOR)
- HEIDI SIEGEL (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
The Road Forward Scholarship Fund was established to fulfill the dream of higher education for economically challenged, local East End high school seniors. While working with high school seniors on their college essays, we learned that many students on the East End of Long Island needed financial support to consider post-high school education. These are the children of families we interact with every day, whose hard work in the service industries helps keep the East End vibrant. Since 2022 we have awarded 34 scholarships. While our initial scholarships were one-year awards, research showed that students had the best chance for success if they receive support each year they are in school. Without continued support, many students are forced to drop out for lack of funds.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization worked to fulfill the dream of higher education for local east end high school seniors who exhibit financial need and are engaged in their community. The organization provided 14 scholarships totaling $18,000 paid over 4 years. There were 2 2-year community college students that can extend for 2 more years if they attend a 4-year school in the future.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 39.6%; rating input score 40
- Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 58.3%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.59; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 47.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 59.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 80.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 39.6% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $103K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 40/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.