The Mind Fitness Training Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270637482
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7038538672
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$-74,581
Expenses
$40,661
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STANLEY ELIZABETH (PRESIDENT, TREASURER, DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • GIMIAN JAMES (DIRECTOR)
  • MOSER RICHARD (DIRECTOR)
  • SCHULTZ TAMMY (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mind fitness training institute (mfti) is a non-profit research and training organization dedicated to teaching mindfulness and resilience skills that enhance performance and strengthen response to stress, change and uncertainty. Mfti's training prepares individuals and groups to adapt, learn and succeed in highly challenging environments. Mfti offers mindfulness-based mind fitness training (mmft) (registered trademark) to military service members and other civil servants that encounter significant occupational stress.

What it reported doing in 2016

A series of nationwide mmft intensive courses offering the benefits of mindfulness-based mind fitness training to individual attendees from high-stress professionsnps/fs: a weeklong mmft intensive course for firefighters at the national park service and forest service

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 2
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 2.4%; rating input score 2
  • Program expense ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 2
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -154.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -44.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -42.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -29% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.4% of revenue deployed · 2.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.