Association for the Sociology of Religion Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237075066
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Janesville, WI, USA
Phone
6084245661
Rating
24
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$145,934
Expenses
$129,003
Assets
$1,220,471
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tricia Bruce (President)
  • Jerry Park (President-Elect)
  • Grace Yukich (Immediate Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Titus Hjelm Non-voting (EDITOR): $13,500 total reported compensation
  • Marta Koodziejska Non-voting (Book Review Editor): $4,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

ASR promotes the field of Sociology of Religion through an annual professional meeting in August the publication of an academic journal Sociology of Religion, the maintenance of a website https : sociologyofreligion. org and the awarding of competitive grants to fund promising research projects.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ordinarily ASR offers research grants titled Joseph H. Fichter Research Grants for promising research in the Sociology of Religion. ASR members can apply for these competitive grants which are evaluated by a 3-member review committee the Joseph Fichter Aware Committee. Awardees have approximately 18 months to complete their projects. Awardees institutions are expected to administer the award on the awardees behalf and must submit a statement that no overhead chrages will be applied and that unused funds will be returned to ASR. Every year the Executive Council of ASR decides how much money it wants to allocate to the Fichter Grants for the upcoming year. Using this dollar figure the review committee evaluates the quality of all applications that meet the eligibility criteria. The committee then reports its selection to the Executive Office which in turn distributes the funding to the research offices at the awardees institution. Upon completion of the research the grantee must submit a written summary of the research and any resulting publications and the research officer at the grantees institution must provide ASR with a final expense report detailing how the funds were spent and certifying with a signature that the expenditures are correct. In 2025 no Fichter Research Grants were awarded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 70%; rating input score 70; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 11.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.46; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $14K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 40 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ForeignGrants column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.