The Center for Spiritual Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 382794019
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2014
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Southfield, MI, USA
- Phone
- 2489488112
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Religion Related N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Religious (unspecified)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,275
- Expenses
- $71,535
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- ELIZABETH ECKERT (DIRECTOR)
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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The teaching of metaphysics; and the teaching of skills and techniques which will enable students to rid themselves of restrictions which inhibit them from true fulfillment, reawaken latent skills and abilities, including the teaching of reiki and to discover their purpose in life and to fully develop spiritually.
What it reported doing in 2014
Self improvement in all aspects of life.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 7
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 50
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1,573.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -39.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -22% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 50.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.