Sapientia Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842853988
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9176393425
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Association

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$359,676
Expenses
$448,338
Assets
$231,861
Liabilities
$32,786

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • NANETTE WALSH (Executive Dir.): $92,863 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

"sapientia initiative's mission is to increase awareness of, and access to, the alexander technique for all. The alexander technique is a well-established educational method and somatic practice that releases patterns of chronic pain and tension that have habitually become a fixed part of how a person thinks, moves, breathes, and acts in the world. The technique works with the musculoskeletal and respiratory systems in connection with cognitive processes to help relieve chronic pain, reduce stress, and improve posture, coordination, and breathing. It is used by many performers for greater ease and accuracy of movement."

What it reported doing in 2024

Alexander technique (at) facilitation, expansion, and outreach.sapientia continued to serve as a sustainable and expanding learning community for those seeking personal growth, health and well-being through the at. To this end, sapientia's community outreach program "at for all" provided discounted and no-cost private lessons to those who would not have otherwise had the opportunity to study. We offered seasonal hybrid and in-person group classes for the general public, and continued learning for teachers. To facilitate private at lessons, the center's fully-equipped rooms were offered free to students training to be teachers, and at below-market rates for teachers and faculty. Finally, an upstate land asset was maintained as a potential site for future residential courses

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.6% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $344K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.