Early Manuscripts Electronic Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352253653
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Rolling Hills Estates, CA, USA
Phone
9098965900
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Libraries

Reported finances

Revenue
$436,224
Expenses
$268,891
Assets
$251,761
Liabilities
$47,765

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael B Phelps (Chairman): $58,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Use digital technologies to preserve and provide access to historical source materials, especially ancient and medieval manuscripts and rare books.

What it reported doing in 2024

EMEL continued to pursue its core mission through projects that used scientific imaging technologies to recover illegible texts in ancient and medieval manuscripts. ProjectsEMEL continued for a second year its project with the Biblioteca Capitolare of Verona, Italy, to determine the best methods to recover erased texts from chemically damaged, palimpsest manuscripts. EMEL organized multiple U.S. and European partners to visit Verona in January and December of 2024 and apply a variety of scientific imaging and measurement technologies to the damaged manuscripts. The project succeeded in identifying technologies capable of detecting erased text on the damaged manuscripts.EMEL collaborated with the Austrian National Library to transport a palimpsest manuscript to the DESY synchrotron in Hamburg, Germany, and apply XRF scanning to the manuscript. XRF scanning revealed previously illegible text on the manuscript.EMEL began a new project in collaboration with Aristotle University in Thessaloniki to recover erased texts from palimpsest manuscripts at Vatopedi Monastery on Mount Athos (Greece). A team of scientists and scholars visited the Monastery in July for a first of five planning digital imaging sessions at the Monastery.EMEL worked throughout 2024 with scientists and scholars to process the multispectral data it collected from palimpsest manuscripts in 2023 and 2024, and therby make the erased layers of text legible for the first time.EducationEMEL personnel and affiliated scientists presented the results of EMEL projects at a variety of conferences and workshops, including: a conference in Sofia, Bulgaria, on the application of technology to cultural heritage; an annual workshop on multispectral imaging for cultural heritage in Trivulziana, Italy, which included students from the U.S. and multiple European countries; a conference in Glasgow, Scotland, discussing the results of EMEL's collaborative project with the University of Glasgow to use scientific imaging to recover information from damaged 7th century Net Testatment manuscripts; and a conference in Norway on scientific imaging and manuscript studies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The strongest available result is that a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.1%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $109.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.1% of revenue deployed · 73.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $197K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.