Einsiedeln Conference Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850387898
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Santa Fe, NM, USA
Phone
5054743276
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,318
Expenses
$49,202
Assets
$43,497
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James Bristol (President)
  • Kathryn Kuisle (Vice-President)
  • Kay Wagner (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • James Bristol (President)
  • Kathryn Kuisle (Vice-President)
  • Joanna Ipiotis Romero (Treasurer)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Psychological and Spiritual Education

What it reported doing in 2013

The mission of the C.G. Jung Conference (Einsiedeln) is to break open the psychological works of C.G. Jung, taking into account the spiritual questions of life. The Conference provides an opportunity explore the integration of Jungian Pyschology & spirituality by means of in-depth lectures by Jungian Analysts, creative expression, rituals, and excursion sites that enhance the experience of the world of C.G. Jung and his homeland of Switzerland. In 2013, there were 16 full time & 4 part time participants. Continuing education credits are approved in the States of New Mexico & California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -66.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.