Every organization looking at the federal scholarship tax credit lands on the same fork: build the Scholarship Granting Organization yourself, or join one that already exists. There is a third answer between them — own the SGO and let somebody else operate it. Here is the honest comparison, and the three questions that usually settle it.
Every conversation we have about the federal scholarship tax credit reaches the same fork within about ten minutes. Someone — a head of school, a diocesan superintendent, a foundation director — understands the credit, believes their families would benefit, and then asks the real question: do we have to build one of these ourselves?
No. There are three ways in, and they are genuinely different products for genuinely different organizations. This post is the comparison without the sales gloss, because picking the wrong one wastes a year you do not have before the credit goes live on January 1, 2027.
The reason there are three rather than two is that the question people ask as one question is really two: whose SGO is it, and who does the operating work? Those have different answers, and answering them separately is what opens up the middle path most organizations end up wanting.
The Three Paths, In One Paragraph Each
Start your own SGO. You form a 501(c)(3) whose purpose is granting scholarships, get listed by every state you intend to operate in, seat a board and an arm's-length scholarship committee, open segregated state accounts, and run the program. Your name is on the receipts. Your committee writes the eligibility rules. The administrative share of every gift — the up-to-10% Section 25F sets aside for operations — is your organization's revenue. You run it on ClearPath, our software, but the SGO is yours in every legal and practical sense.
Own the SGO, and have it operated for you. Identical to the first path in every legal and brand respect — you form the 501(c)(3), you seat the board, your name is on the receipts, your committee writes the eligibility rules and decides every award — except that the operating work is done by somebody else's staff instead of yours. That is ClearPath Managed: gift processing and receipts, application intake, income verification, docket preparation, disbursement, per-state 90/10 bookkeeping, state reports, and the audit package. The administrative share of each gift pays that team rather than funding your own hires. You can take it in-house whenever you want, because the entity, the donors, and the history were yours the entire time.
Join an SGO as a partner school. SGO Guide also operates certified SGOs directly. A school joins one as a ClearPath Partner School: you are vetted and approved, you get a branded giving page, a QR code, and an embeddable widget, donors can name your school as their preferred school, and your one recurring job is confirming that a student is actually enrolled. Every Section 25F obligation — state listing, segregated accounts, the 90/10 test, receipts, the annual audit — stays with the SGO. You earn a partner fee (3% by default) on the gifts that named your school.
One asymmetry worth stating plainly before you read the rest: our partner-school program is not open yet. We are standing the SGO up ahead of the January 1, 2027 start of the credit, and schools can join the early-access list at no cost and no commitment. Forming your own SGO — with your staff or with ours — is something you can begin today, and since it takes months, an organization leaning that way should not wait on us. Everything below compares the three models on their merits; the timing is a separate fact to hold alongside it.
Same statute, same credit, same families. Very different amount of work.
What Starting Your Own Actually Buys You
Three things, and they are the only three worth forming an entity over.
Control over who gets a scholarship. This is the big one. Under Section 25F the award decision must be made at arm's length, and donors can never earmark — but the criteria are the SGO's to write. Which students are eligible, how a returning student is prioritized, what a sibling is worth, whether a family at 250% of area median income outranks one at 290%, how large an award is. If your organization has a view on any of that, it needs to be the SGO. A partner school does not get a vote on award policy, and no honest partner program can offer one. (The mechanics of doing this compliantly are in How to Run a Compliant Scholarship Award Process.)
Ownership of the donor relationship. Your donors give because of you — your mission, your track record, your head of school's letter. When they give through your own SGO, the receipt has your name on it, the donor record is yours, and the relationship compounds year over year. When they give through someone else's SGO, the legal donor of record is that SGO. Your school is named on the page and honored in the acknowledgment, but the tax document says someone else.
The administrative share as revenue. Section 25F permits up to 10% of each state account to be released for operations. In your own SGO, that allowance funds your staff, your systems, and your growth — minus what you spend on software and services. Over a $2 million program, that is real institutional money. It is also the reason the math changes with scale: the cost of forming and auditing an SGO is close to fixed, so it lands very differently against $2 million of annual giving than against $80,000. (What that 10% can and cannot pay for is a subtler question than most people expect — see The 90/10 Rule Is a Withdrawal Cap, Not an Expense Rule.)
What Starting Your Own Actually Costs
Also three things, and they are routinely underestimated.
Time, measured in months. Entity formation, IRS recognition, state listing in each state you serve, bank and segregated account setup, board recruitment, committee seating, policy adoption. Even run well, this is not a six-week project. An organization starting the conversation in late 2026 and hoping to take gifts in January 2027 is, in most states, already late.
Governance that is real, not nominal. A board that actually meets. A scholarship committee whose members are independent enough to survive the disqualified-person rules — which, as we covered in Selection Committees and Disqualified Persons, disqualify committee members' own families from receiving scholarships from that SGO. In a small, tight community, seating a committee that is both knowledgeable and independent is harder than it sounds.
An operating burden that never ends. Per-state 90/10 accounting. Income verification against 300% of area median income. State annual reporting. Records retention. An annual audit from year one. Software handles most of the mechanics — that is what ClearPath is — but somebody at your organization still owns the function, answers the auditor, and signs the filing.
The Middle Path: Own It, Don't Staff It
Read those three costs again and notice that only one of them is really about ownership. Time and governance are the price of having your own SGO. The third — an operating burden that never ends — is the price of doing the work, and it is the one that can be bought out.
That is the whole idea behind a managed engagement. The entity is yours. The board is yours. The scholarship policy is yours, and so is every award decision — that part is not optional and not for sale, because Section 25F requires awards to be made at arm's length by the organization itself. What moves is the desk work: receipting, verifying, disbursing, reconciling, reporting.
Why this matters more in 2027 than it will in 2032. There is no pool of experienced SGO administrators to hire from. The statute is new; the job did not exist eighteen months ago. An organization that decides to run its own operation is not choosing between a good hire and a great one — it is choosing between an unproven hire and no hire at all, in the first year of a program where the mistakes are cheapest to make and most expensive to explain. Renting a team that already does this for other programs is a defensible answer to that, and so is deciding you would rather learn it yourself. What is not defensible is assuming somebody on staff will absorb it alongside their existing job.
What it costs. The same thing running it yourself costs, pointed at a different payroll. The managed fee comes out of the ≤10% operating allowance — the same share that would otherwise fund your own administrator, your own audit prep, your own systems. You are not paying extra; you are paying somebody else. Which is exactly why the calculus flips with scale: at $2 million of annual giving, that allowance can fund a real internal team and the argument for keeping it in-house gets strong. At $200,000 it cannot fund one competent full-time person, and pretending otherwise is how programs end up out of compliance.
What you give up. The administrative share as institutional revenue — it pays a vendor instead of your staff. And the tacit knowledge that comes from doing the work: an organization whose team has never processed a disbursement has a thinner feel for its own program. Both are real. Neither is fatal, and neither is permanent.
What Joining Buys You
Speed and a floor of zero. Apply, get vetted, get approved, go live. Days, not quarters. No formation cost, no filing fees, no audit line item, no legal retainer. If your board wants to see whether the credit actually moves money in your community before committing to an entity, this is how you find out — with real gifts from real families, not a projection.
No compliance surface of your own. You are not the one tracking the 90/10 test, reconciling a segregated account, or producing an evidence package. The SGO carries all of it, because the SGO is the regulated party.
A fee for the one job only you can do. A school knows something no SGO can know from the outside: whether a student is actually enrolled and attending. That confirmation is the linchpin of a compliant disbursement, and partner schools are paid for it — 3% of the gifts that named the school, accrued on a visible ledger, paid from the SGO's operating allowance and never from scholarship dollars.
A brand your community recognizes. The giving page carries your school's name, colors, and logo. Parents scanning a QR code at back-to-school night see your school, not a stranger's.
An exit that costs nothing. You did not create a legal entity. If the program does not work for your community, you stop.
What Joining Costs
One thing, stated plainly: you do not decide who gets the money.
The SGO's committee makes every award. Donor preferences for your school are visible to that committee and are genuinely weighed — the preferred-school pool is a real input — but Section 25F prohibits earmarking, so a preference can never bind the outcome. A donor who gives $1,700 naming your school has not bought a scholarship for your school. Any program that implies otherwise is selling something that will not survive an audit.
Two smaller ones follow from it. You do not set eligibility rules, award sizes, or the application calendar. And your economics are a partner fee, not the full administrative share.
The Three Questions That Usually Settle It
Skip the feature comparison and answer these.
1. Does your organization have a view about who should get a scholarship that a general-purpose SGO cannot implement? "Low-income families in our county" is implementable by anyone. "Students in our diocese, weighted by parish participation and assessed by our own aid office" is not. If your answer is specific, you need your own SGO.
2. What will you realistically raise in year one? Not the ambition — the bottoms-up number from donors you can name. Under roughly a couple hundred thousand dollars, the fixed cost of formation and audit eats a painful share of a 10% allowance, and joining is usually the better use of the same money. Well above it, the allowance funds a real program and formation pays for itself. Our state-by-state market math is a decent sanity check on the ceiling.
3. Do you have someone who will own compliance on Monday morning? Not a consultant for the launch — a person on your staff whose job includes the 90/10 report and the state filing, every year. If you cannot name them, you are describing one of the other two paths — and which one depends on your answer to question 1. If your organization has a real view on award criteria, you want your own SGO with somebody else operating it. If it does not, you want to be a partner school.
Notice that the three questions do not map one-to-one onto the three paths, and that is the point. Questions 1 and 2 decide whether the SGO should be yours. Question 3 decides who runs it. Answer them in that order and the path falls out.
The False Choice, and the Order That Usually Works
The most common mistake is treating "form our own" as the serious option and "join" as the half-measure. It is the reverse as often as not. A school that joins in January 2027 and funds thirty families that year has done more than a school that spends 2027 in formation and funds none.
The second most common mistake is deciding you cannot own an SGO because you cannot staff one. Those are separate questions, and collapsing them into one has probably cost more organizations their own program than any other error in this space. If ownership matters to you and staffing does not exist, form the entity and hire the operation.
It is also not a permanent decision in the direction people assume. Joining first and forming later is a normal sequence: you learn what your donor base actually does at the $1,700 cap, you find out whether your families clear the income test, you build the list — and then you form an entity against evidence instead of a spreadsheet. Nothing about being a partner school forecloses forming your own SGO in 2028.
What does not work is the reverse: forming an entity, discovering the program raises $60,000, and carrying an audit requirement against it.
Where to Go From Here
If what you actually want to know is what the operating job consists of week to week — the thing that decides question 3 above — that is itemized in Starting an SGO: Who Is Actually Going to Run It?, along with the scale arithmetic on when an internal team pays for itself.
We keep a full side-by-side of all three models — time to first gift, cost to start, who decides scholarships, whose brand donors see, compliance burden, governance, staffing, your share of a gift, and multi-state expansion — with an explicit "probably not you if" for each, at Start or Join an SGO. If the middle path is the one you are weighing, ClearPath Managed is the detail: what we do, what never leaves your board, and how the handover back to your own staff works. If you already know you are the joining kind, the next question is which SGO — twelve questions for vetting one — and ClearPath Partner Schools has the mechanics and the early-access list, though ours is not accepting schools yet. If you are weighing formation against partnering with an SGO that is not ours, the older and more general framework for that decision still holds.
One note that applies to every path, because it surprises people: a Section 25F qualified contribution must be cash — card, ACH, check, wire, or cash. Appreciated stock does not qualify, and donor-advised fund grants do not earn the credit, because the credit runs to the individual taxpayer. Whichever path you choose, the giving program you are building is a cash program aimed at individuals, clustered at $1,700. Plan the rails accordingly — starting with the processing fees.
All three paths end in the same place: a family that can afford the school that fits their child. Pick the one that gets you there in 2027.
Get Section 25F updates for your state
A short email the moment your state's opt-in status changes, plus formation deadlines as January 1, 2027 approaches.
Disclaimer: This post provides general information and analysis for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal or tax advice. Regulatory requirements under Section 25F are still evolving. Consult qualified legal and tax counsel before making decisions about SGO formation, structure, or operations.
Related reading
Can You Use an Existing 501(c)(3) as Your SGO — and Just Register It in Every State?
Nothing in Section 25F requires a new entity, so the legal answer is yes. The practical answer is usually no, and it comes down to one sentence in Treasury's June preview about how the 90 percent test is measured. Here is the full analysis — the four things your organization's history brings with it, why 'register in every state' is a different question than it sounds, and what to settle before the proposed regulations land at the end of September.
Starting an SGO: Who Is Actually Going to Run It?
Forming a Scholarship Granting Organization is a project with an end date. Operating one is a job with no end date, and it is the half nobody costs out. Here is the real week-to-week work, and the three honest ways to get it done: staff it yourself, own the SGO and outsource the operation, or join one that already runs.
How a Single School Starts Its Own SGO — and the Rule That Decides Whether It Should
A single school can absolutely form a scholarship granting organization. What it cannot do is use it the way most single schools are imagining. One sentence in the statute — ten or more students who do not all attend the same school — reshapes the entire project, and it is better understood before incorporation than after.