Anthroposophical Society in America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131628147
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7346629355
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,016,357
Expenses
$1,080,920
Assets
$2,827,172
Liabilities
$72,219

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY STEWART ADAMS (PRESIDENT AND GENERAL SECR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY STEWART ADAMS (PRESIDENT AND GENERAL SECR): $103,135 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD LEDERMAN (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $90,634 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The anthroposophical society in america is an association of people seeking to nurture the life of the soul and to explore what it means to be truly human, based on spiritual science arising out of the work of rudolf steiner. We serve the public through our own actions, the initiatives of its members, and the activities of the school for spiritual science.

What it reported doing in 2025

The society provides educational services in the form of lectures, study intensives, webinars, and conferences. Some of the 2025 activity included the annual conference, annual general meeting, an in-person festival event, plus 1 international conference reception, 2 different weeks-long online study intensives, 2 different webinars, live speakers, small group intensives, 3 online festival events over the course of the year, and 1 nationwide study group meeting monthly. We also provide support for many such study groups, nationwide.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $90.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 67.4%; rating input score 67; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.4% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $755K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.