The Michael Newton Inst for Life Between Lives

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203518700
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Wilmington, NC, USA
Phone
8286748928
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Behavioral Science

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,731
Expenses
$122,825
Assets
$54,983
Liabilities
$11,710

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Diana Paque (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Indrani Sinha (Director)
  • Sanela Covic (Director)
  • Llse Ambrose (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To facitate the integration of body , mind and soul. It is an organization for hypnosis practioners engaged in life between lives spiritual regression to further advances in practice of life between lives hypnotherapy-

What it reported doing in 2025

LBL Training is an educational course that teaches students the Life Between Lives(r) method of hypnotherapy. The 2025 training consisted of 3 weeks of live instruction over the course of 9 months, but up to a year of personal mentoring and case study review for each student. The 2025 training was held virtually for 2 of the course weeks, and in-person (with a virtual option) for one of the weeks. This week was held in Los Angeles, CA.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 12.5%; rating input score 12; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.3%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $93K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.