The Waldorf Institute of Southern California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237414480
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Northridge, CA, USA
Phone
8183496272
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$244,340
Expenses
$226,878
Assets
$151,609
Liabilities
$1,086

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AILEEN LEIJTEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CATHY ONEILL (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AILEEN LEIJTEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $48,903 total reported compensation
  • JACQUELINE DEVELLE (TRUSTEE): $16,112 total reported compensation
  • SHIVANI BURROWS GOODWILL (TRUSTEE): $8,733 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To offer current & prospective teachers a preparation for waldorf teaching encompassing transformative experiences of artistic & teaching practice, collaborative work & developing an essential relation to the spiritual understanding & path that is the source of waldorf education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Four weeks of summer courses - waldorf teacher preparation - five days a week, eight hours a day. No grants given. Revenue arises as tuition is paid.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% 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 voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • 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: 54.5%; rating input score 55; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $205K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.