Precious Blood Spirituality Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873541202
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7734516710
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,150,997
Expenses
$347,779
Assets
$13,494,780
Liabilities
$10,054,960

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Victoria Otto (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Victoria Otto (President): $77,730 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Precious Blood Spirituality Institute seeks: *To facilitate and encourage all the collaborative efforts to promote Precious Blood spirituality and the charisms of the Precious Blood Communities in the Roman Catholic Church and the world. *To serve as a resource to the leadership teams of the Precious Blood congregations offering assistance as they foster the embodiment of the charism in the lives and ministry of their members. *To serve as a resource to all those who serve in ministry in the congregations of the Precious Blood communities as they seek to embody the charism in their ministry.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Robert J Schreiter Institute of Precious Blood Spirituality has a mission to foster the further development of a practical theology of the Precious Blood and the promotion of spirituality which embodies that theology through focused academic scholarship and a program of pastoral education that emphasizes the praxis of reconciliation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 67
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.1%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 38.8; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.1% of revenue deployed · 59.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $208K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 18/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.