Inner Dynamics Alliance for Structural Integration
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 384319908
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Portland, OR, USA
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Vocational, Technical Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $41,330
- Expenses
- $24,574
- Assets
- $17,266
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jay Williams (Executive Director)
- Scott Gauthier (Board President)
- Kat Kocurek (Board President)
People named in this filing
- Jay Williams (Executive Director)
- Scott Gauthier (Board President)
- Kat Kocurek (Board President)
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
To provide education and training in Structural Integration and related bodywork disciplines and to expand access to this education through community-based and scholarship-supported programs.
What it reported doing in 2025
Established and approved scholarship and access initiatives to support equitable participation in future Structural Integration training programs. During the tax year the organization approved approximately $30,000 in tuition-based scholarships including Equity Advancement Scholarships Community Clinic Internship Scholarships and work-study administrative awards. Scholarships were structured as tuition reductions and did not involve direct cash disbursements during the year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% 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
MIXED - 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: 36
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 28.9%; rating input score 29
- Program expense ratio: 48.6%; rating input score 49
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.5%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 28.9% of revenue deployed · 48.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.