Germanic-American Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
416025383
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
St. Paul, MN, USA
Phone
651-222-7027
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,195,120
Expenses
$1,631,758
Assets
$2,073,466
Liabilities
$362,745

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JEANA ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DI): $81,697 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Connecting people to a broader world through German language and culture.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cultural programming & advocacy - the gai offers public cultural programs throughout the year that are free or very affordable. Larger events include the deutsche tage celebration, st. Paul's oldest ethnic festival, as well as the st. Paul oktoberfest. Additional programming includes events such as art and history exhibits, book readings, documentary screenings, current event discussions, and holiday concerts and meals. The gai's advocacy work focuses on goals 4, 7, and 16 of the united nations sustainable development goals. Goal 4 is to provide quality education. The gai is an official apprenticeship ambassador of the us department of labor. Goal 7 is for germany and the us to work together to develop better green energy technology. Goal 16 is to foster peace through collaborating with other ethnic organizations.

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 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.4%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 56.4% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.