Cru Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911845372
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Freeland, WA, USA
- Phone
- 4258694041
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Dispute Resolution, Mediation Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $54,133
- Expenses
- $55,731
- Assets
- $19,637
- Liabilities
- $840
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Diane Tuttle (President)
People named in this filing
- Diane Tuttle (President)
- Jelani Quinn (Members)
- Deanna Morris (Members)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of CRU Institute is to teach young people effective, peaceful ways to resolve conflict and to develop understanding, respect, and the ability to cooperate with others in a multicultural world. CRU Institute teaches young people conflict resolution skills and encourages understanding and awareness of cultural differences.
What it reported doing in 2025
CRU's programs teach young people to understand and respect cultural differences and to deal effectively with bullying. Mediation encourages being your own mediator and resolving your own disputes. It builds selfconfidence and encourages inclusion of others.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 51.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.