Ruah Woods Institute
Legal name: Ruah Woods
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262221421
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Cincinnati, OH, US
- Phone
- 513-407-8672
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Adult, Continuing Education
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,320,561
- Expenses
- $3,510,023
- Assets
- $4,467,002
- Liabilities
- $106,393
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- COURTNEY BROWN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- STEVE TRIMBLE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- TONY MAAS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREW SODERGREN (DIRECTOR OF PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES): $180,541 total reported compensation
- COURTNEY BROWN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,456 total reported compensation
- EMILLY DOWDELL (EMPLOYEE): $129,804 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As a formation ministry, Ruah Woods Institute is here to serve the Catholic community in applying the Theology of the Body to our everyday lives — becoming more of the sons and daughters God, our Father, created us to be.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ruah woods psychological services (rwps) provides psychological counseling to a variety of patients in keepting with the teachings of the catholic church. In 2024, rwps employed five clinitions and provided services in cincinnati and dayton, oh. In 2024, rwps provided 5,421 clinical units of psychological counseling. Rwps provided 32 psychological evaluations for candidates to catholic seminaries and religious orders.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $37.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 34%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.