Elijah Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921778213
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Lakeville, MN, USA
Phone
6122403814
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Mental Health Treatment F31 Psychiatric, Mental Health Hospital

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,849
Expenses
$63,502
Assets
$23,453

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rebecca Brubaker (President & CEO)
  • KAREN DOLL (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Rebecca Brubaker (President & CEO)
  • KAREN DOLL (Vice President)
  • RICHARD GARDELL (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Elijah Institute is recognized by NBCC as an Approved Continuing Education Provider, ACEP No. 7719. We offer faith-based programs with a framework the Biopsychosocial-Spiritual-Moral model that takes seriously all five dimensions of human experience, including the moral domain: conscience, agency, forgiveness, and what it means to live with integrity after suffering. No other clinical framework addresses this as a distinct area of care.

What it reported doing in 2025

Clinical Formation (CC-SIP): During 2025 the Institute produced 33 individual Level 1 courses of its Certificate in Catholic Christian Spiritually Integrated Psychotherapy (CC-SIP) a multi-level online continuing-education curriculum (NBCC ACEP No. 7719) that equips licensed mental health clinicians to integrate Catholic anthropology into clinical practice completing the programs foundational tier, now in pre-enrollment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.