Meadowlark Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411888449
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- Apple Valley, MN, USA
- Phone
- 2182801105
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts Council/Agency
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $32,953
- Expenses
- $37,353
- Assets
- $10,549
- Liabilities
- $8,309
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JERRY NAGEL (President)
Highest reported compensation
- JERRY NAGEL (President): $19,963 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The meadowlark institute is committed to bringing the practices hosting and harvesting conversations that matter into our everyday work and lives. Our mission is simple, yet reflects a deep commitment to purpose - making a difference in the world. The meadowlark institute believes strongly that participatory leadership and dialogue processes create communities and organizations where people are treated with respect and where there is an opportunity for all voices to be present and to be heard. These processes bring forth the knowledge, wisdom and leadership capacity that is within each of us, our organizations and our communities. Our work is often centered on many of society's most difficult issues, including race, gender, age, sexual orientation and political and economic power.at the meadowlark institute we believe one of the most important decisions an organization, community or business will make is the selection of who will serve as their convener or host for convening, planning
What it reported doing in 2020
Meadowlark institute provided training in the art of hosting conversations that matter to increase participant's capabilities to hold conversations on issues of importance to their community or organization.meadowlark institute provided ongoing support, training and coaching to the people that have participated in an art of hosting training, primarily people in the united states.meadowlark institute hosted/facilitated conversations in communities or organizations on issues of importance. These are often non-profit organizations with limited resources and the issues are often difficult or adversarial.
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 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 66
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 95.9%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -13.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 53.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -26.5% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -13.8% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -18.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2020
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.