The Elinguistics Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454211155
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Grosse Pointe, MI, USA
Phone
3135745223
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,634
Expenses
$10,973
Assets
$49,596

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STANLEY DUBINSKY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN MORAN (DIRECTOR)
  • DR GEOFFREY S NATHAN (TREASURER)
  • DR HELEN ARISTAR DRY (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the discipline of linguistics; to support digital initiatives and enhancement of the digital infrastructure in the field of linguistics; to support research in linguistics and language technology; to support the development of standards and promotion of best practices for the creation and preservation of digital language media; and to support students of linguistics and their training in language technologies.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mission of the elinguistics foundation is to support the discipline of linguistics, mainly to support the linguist list, which is at this point an auxiliary located at Indiana university. They also support coling, a lingustic conference.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 59

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.8%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.52; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.6% of revenue deployed · 59.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.