Cg Jung Study Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421541952
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA, USA
Phone
3102042199
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Behavioral Science

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,683
Expenses
$148,307
Assets
$311,101
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JORGE DE LA O (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JORGE DE LA O (President): $21,800 total reported compensation
  • SHAWN KLEIN (Treasurer): $6,700 total reported compensation
  • JOYCE HEYRAUD (Director): $5,950 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 train psychotherapists and other students to become jungian analysts by providing them with advanced analytical training via program focused on teachings of c.g. Jung. We encourage individual research and publication on all aspects of basic jungian theory and practice. In addition, we also offer educational programs for mental health professionals and the general public.

What it reported doing in 2024

Curiculum established. Publications distributed to attract students. Classes and instructors continuing. Many students have completed their fourth year of instruction and have graduated to become jungian analysts. Curiculum and student base has been expanded. New students have been admitted and are in the first year of instruction. Membership has been established in national and international organizations in the area of psychology taught at center. Seminars open to the public offered and completed. Frequency of public seminars expanded. Public forum identifies and attracts possible future students. Jungian students who have began their training elsewhere have been attracted to complete their education by joining current third and fourth year students here at the center.

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 94% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.7%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.6%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.1; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.7% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 0 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $111K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.