Applied Scholastics International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237250829
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3143556355
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,680,176
Expenses
$2,849,641
Assets
$712,038
Liabilities
$662,307

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Christine Gerson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christine Gerson (President): $70,418 total reported compensation
  • Craig Burton (Treasurer): $50,982 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve and revitalize the field of education by instructing students and teachers in the proper method of studying using Study Technology developed by educator and humanitarian L. Ron Hubbard.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and Literacy Programs - Applied Scholastics International and licensed groups trained 4,526 educators from 9 countries during 2024 to recognize and overcome the barriers students routinely encountered. These include strategies for working within classrooms with diverse levels of student competency, techniques for closing the gaps in student academic achievement; specialized tutoring techniques for phonics, sight word repertoire, subject vocabulary, and comprehension strategies. In 2024, 350 educators were trained through course delivery and one-day workshops in Samoa in partnership with the Ministry of Education and Culture Samoa, 568 educators were trained through workshops in Liberia and Ghana, and 134 teachers were trained through a teacher training college in Nigeria.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, 8% for grants, and 48% for affiliated organizations.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.3% of revenue deployed · 91.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.