Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
Go to
www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.
| (i) Name of supported organization | (ii) EIN | (iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1- 10 above (see instructions)) | (iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document? | (v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions) | (vi) Amount of other support (see instructions) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||
|
Total |
||||||
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grant.") .. | 494,279 | 465,161 | 428,166 | 567,818 | 687,813 | 2,643,237 |
| 2 | Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.... | ||||||
| 3 | The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge.. | ||||||
| 4 | Total. Add lines 1 through 3 | 494,279 | 465,161 | 428,166 | 567,818 | 687,813 | 2,643,237 |
| 5 | The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f) .. | 1,183,539 | |||||
| 6 | Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4. | 1,459,698 | |||||
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Amounts from line 4.. | 494,279 | 465,161 | 428,166 | 567,818 | 687,813 | 2,643,237 |
| 8 | Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources... | 24,050 | 22,899 | 21,073 | 24,212 | 30,692 | 122,926 |
| 9 | Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.. | ||||||
| 10 | Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.).. | ||||||
| 11 | Total support. Add lines 7 through 10 | 2,773,201 | |||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") . | ||||||
| 2 | Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose | ||||||
| 3 | Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513 ..... | ||||||
| 4 | Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf... | ||||||
| 5 | The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge | ||||||
| 6 | Total. Add lines 1 through 5 | ||||||
| 7a | Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons | ||||||
| b | Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year. | ||||||
| c | Add lines 7a and 7b.. | ||||||
| 8 | Public support. (Subtract line 7c from line 6.) | ||||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Amounts from line 6... | ||||||
| 10a | Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources.. | ||||||
| b | Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975. | ||||||
| c | Add lines 10a and 10b. | ||||||
| 11 | Net income from unrelated business activities not included on line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on. | ||||||
| 12 | Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) .. | ||||||
| 13 | Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.).. | ||||||
| Section A - Adjusted Net Income | (A) Prior Year |
(B) Current Year (optional) |
||||
| 1 | Net short-term capital gain | 1 | ||||
| 2 | Recoveries of prior-year distributions | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Other gross income (see instructions) | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Add lines 1 through 3 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Depreciation and depletion | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions) | 6 | ||||
| 7 | Other expenses (see instructions) | 7 | ||||
| 8 | Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4) | 8 | ||||
| Section B - Minimum Asset Amount | (A) Prior Year |
(B) Current Year (optional) |
||||
| 1 | Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year): | 1 | ||||
| a | Average monthly value of securities | 1a | ||||
| b | Average monthly cash balances | 1b | ||||
| c | Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets | 1c | ||||
| d | Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c) | 1d | ||||
| e |
Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI): |
|||||
| 2 | Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Subtract line 2 from line 1d | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 0.015 of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions). | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3) | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Multiply line 5 by 0.035 | 6 | ||||
| 7 | Recoveries of prior-year distributions | 7 | ||||
| 8 | Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6) | 8 | ||||
| Section C - Distributable Amount | Current Year | |||||
| 1 | Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A) | 1 | ||||
| 2 | Enter 85% of line 1 | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A) | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Enter greater of line 2 or line 3 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Income tax imposed in prior year | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions) | 6 | ||||
| Section D - Distributions | Current Year | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes | 1 | |
|
2
Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity |
2 | |
| 3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations | 3 | |
| 4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets | 4 | |
| 5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required - provide details in Part VI) | 5 | |
| 6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions | 6 | |
| 7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6. | 7 | |
|
8
Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions |
8 | |
| 9 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6 | 9 | |
| 10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount | 10 | |
| Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions) |
(i) Excess Distributions |
(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2022 |
(iii) Distributable Amount for 2022 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6 | ||||
|
2
Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2022 (reasonable cause required-- explain in Part VI).
See instructions. |
||||
| 3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2022: | ||||
| a From 2017....... | ||||
| b From 2018....... | ||||
| c From 2019....... | ||||
| d From 2020....... | ||||
| e From 2021....... | ||||
| fTotal of lines 3a through e | ||||
| g Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| h Applied to 2022 distributable amount | ||||
|
i
Carryover from 2017 not applied (see instructions) |
||||
| j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from line 3f. | ||||
| 4Distributions for 2022 from Section D, line 7: | ||||
| $ | ||||
| a Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| b Applied to 2022 distributable amount | ||||
| c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from line 4. | ||||
|
5
Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2022, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
6
Remaining underdistributions for 2022. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2023. Add lines 3j and 4c. |
||||
| 8 Breakdown of line 7: | ||||
| a Excess from 2018..... | ||||
| b Excess from 2019..... | ||||
| c Excess from 2020..... | ||||
| d Excess from 2021..... | ||||
| e Excess from 2022..... | ||||
| Facts And Circumstances Test |
|---|
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |
Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| FORM 990 - ORGANIZATION'S MISSION | THE OBJECTIVES AND GOALS OF THE INSTITUTE SHALL BE TO RECEIVE AND ADMINISTER FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AND SUPPORTING EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LAWYERS, LEGAL ACADEMICS, AND MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY, CONFERENCES AND PUBLICATIONS WHICH WILL ADVANCE THE STUDY AND SCIENCE OF JURISPRUDENCE; AND TO PROMOTE THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 2, PART III, LINE 4A | 2023 JUDGES FORUM: EXPERT TESTIMONY: JUDGES, VOIR DIRE, AND TRIAL BY JURY. THIS 31ST ANNUAL JUDGES FORUM WAS HELD IN PERSON JULY 15, 2023 IN PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. 81 JUDGES, ACADEMICS, AND ATTORNEYS FROM 29 STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEARNED ABOUT THE UNIQUE NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE IN AMERICAN CIVIL JUSTICE, AND CONSIDERED WHETHER MODERATING THE ROLE OF JUDGES AS EVIDENCE GATEKEEPERS WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR COURTS AND FOR THE AMERICAN LEGAL AND POLITICAL SYSTEM AS A WHOLE. THE CONVERSATIONS WERE FRAMED BY OUTSTANDING PAPERS: "EXPERT EVIDENCE: EVOLUTION OF RULES AND PRACTICES" BY PROF. MICHAEL SAKS (ASU); AND "JUDICIAL GATEKEEPING, EXPERT TESTIMONY AND PERCEPTIONS OF COURTS" BY PROF. ANNE BLOOM (BERKELEY). JUDGES ENJOYED INSIGHTFUL COMMENTS BY PANELS OF LAWYERS, JUDGES, AND PROFESSORS, AND ENGAGED WITH EACH OTHER DURING SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS. DURING LUNCH, JOYCE AND JASON DAUBERT DISCUSSED THEIR LITIGATION JOURNEY WHICH ULTIMATELY LED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A LEGAL EVIDENCE STANDARD BEARING THEIR NAME. ATTENDING JUDGES GAVE THE FORUM AN OVERALL RATING OF 4.8 OUT OF 5. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 2, PART III, LINE 4B | 2023 ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM ON SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS. ON MARCH 31-APRIL 1, 2023, NCJI PARTNERED WITH THE SMU DEDMAN SCHOOL OF LAW IN PRESENTING AN ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM, THE FUTURE OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS: WHAT ARE THE STAKES? THE 2-DAY CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT SMU IN DALLAS, TX AND FEATURED 10 ORIGINAL ACADEMIC PAPERS ADDRESSING A VARIETY OF TOPICS RELATING TO SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS: THE RIGHTS TO ACADEMIC FREEDOM, TRAVEL, AND END-OF-LIFE CARE; THE ROLE OF STATE COURTS AND CONSTITUTIONS; SECRECY AND TRANSPARENCY IN SDP LITIGATION; CHALLENGES IN CIVIL RIGHTS LITIGATION; GENDER AND REPRODUCTIVE ISSUES; THE IMPORTANCE OF SDP TO OUR DEMOCRACY; AND THE CIVIL RIGHT TO COUNSEL. DEAN ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (BERKELEY LAW) DELIVERED THE KEYNOTE ADDRESS, AND AN OUTSTANDING FACULTY LED PROVOCATIVE DISCUSSIONS ON THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES. THE AUDIENCE CONSISTED OF JUDGES AND LAW PROFESSORS FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY, LAW STUDENTS, ATTORNEYS, NON-PROFIT PROFESSIONALS, COURT CLERKS, AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS. THE FINAL PAPERS WILL BE PUBLISHED IN THE FALL 2023 ISSUE OF THE SMU LAW REVIEW. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 2, PART III, LINE 4C | THE INSTITUTE'S 2023 APPELLATE ADVOCACY AWARD WAS PRESENTED TO ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN SECURING FINAL APPELLATE COURT DECISIONS WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, CONSUMER RIGHTS, CIVIL RIGHTS, AND MORE. THE 2023 AWARD WAS PRESENTED-FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE AWARD'S HISTORY-TO ATTORNEYS IN TWO VERY DESERVING VICTORIES: KARLA GILBRIDE AND LEAH NICHOLLS (THEN BOTH OF PUBLIC JUSTICE) FOR MORGAN V. SUNDANCE, 142 S. CT. 1708 (2022), REPRESENTING A MAJOR FORCED ARBITRATION WIN BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT; AND TIMOTHY BILLION OF ROBINS KAPLAN LLP FOR ROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE V. UNITED STATES, 9 F.4TH 1018 (8TH CIR. 2021), IN A CRUCIAL TRIBAL RIGHTS VICTORY. MORGAN V. SUNDANCE: IN RECENT YEARS THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS PROMOTED THE MECHANISM OF ARBITRATION OVER LITIGATION AND EXPANDING THE REACH OF THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT, WITH DISASTROUS RESULTS FOR CONSUMERS, WORKERS, AND OTHERS WHO NEED TO PURSUE LEGAL REMEDIES IN COURT. MANY, IF NOT MOST, MODERN COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS INCLUDE MANDATORY ARBITRATION CLAUSES THAT MAKE IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSUMERS OR WORKERS TO OBTAIN MEANINGFUL REDRESS, BECAUSE THE LARGER CORPORATE PARTY CAN USUALLY DICTATE ITS OWN TERMS. WHEN ROBYN MORGAN WAS HIRED AS AN HOURLY EMPLOYEE AT A TACO BELL RESTAURANT OWNED BY SUNDANCE, INC., SHE WAS REQUIRED TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE ANY EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE. NEVERTHELESS, WHEN SHE BELIEVED THAT SUNDANCE WAS VIOLATING APPLICABLE LAW WITH RESPECT TO OVERTIME PAY, SHE FILED A NATIONWIDE COLLECTIVE ACTION AGAINST THE COMPANY UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT (FLSA). AFTER EIGHT MONTHS OF LITIGATION, DURING WHICH SUNDANCE SOUGHT DISMISSAL AND PARTICIPATED IN UNSUCCESSFUL MEDIATION, THE COMPANY MOVED TO COMPEL ARBITRATION UNDER THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT (FAA). ITS MOTION WAS DENIED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, BUT, ON SUNDANCE'S APPEAL, THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT REVERSED AND REMANDED. REPRESENTED BY KARLA GILBRIDE AND LEAH NICHOLLS, MS. MORGAN TOOK HER CASE TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. MORGAN ARGUED THAT, BY LITIGATING FOR TOO LONG, SUNDANCE HAD WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO COMPEL ARBITRATION. SUNDANCE ARGUED THAT ITS DELAY IN SEEKING ARBITRATION HAD NOT PREJUDICED THE PLAINTIFF, AND THAT IT WAS ENTITLED TO ARBITRATE. IN MORGAN V. SUNDANCE, INC., 142 S. CT. 1708 (2022), THE SUPREME COURT UNANIMOUSLY VACATED AND REMANDED. IN AN OPINION BY JUSTICE KAGAN, THE COURT HELD THAT PREJUDICE IS NOT A CONDITION FOR FINDING THAT A PARTY, BY LITIGATING TOO LONG, WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO STAY LITIGATION OR COMPEL ARBITRATION. THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION OVERRULED THE 8TH CIRCUIT AND EIGHT OTHER CIRCUITS THAT HAD EMBRACED ARBITRATION-SPECIFIC WAIVER RULES REQUIRING A SHOWING OF PREJUDICE TO THE NON-WAIVING PARTY. THIS HOLDING MAKES IT EASIER FOR CLAIMANTS TO SHOW THAT A DEFENDANT HAS WAIVED A RIGHT TO COMPEL ARBITRATION BY PARTICIPATING SUBSTANTIALLY IN LITIGATION WITHOUT REGARD TO WHETHER SUCH PARTICIPATION HAS PREJUDICED THE CLAIMANT. ROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE V. UNITED STATES: TIMOTHY BILLION OF ROBINS KAPLAN LLP IN MINNEAPOLIS, MN LED A PRO BONO EFFORT ON BEHALF OF THE ROSEBUD SIOUX INDIAN TRIBE TO REMEDY HISTORICALLY INADEQUATE HEALTHCARE FOR TRIBE'S MEMBERS AND SECURE QUALITY CARE IN THE FUTURE. HE USED THE INNOVATIVE VEHICLE OF A COMPLAINT FOR A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT THE 1868 TREATY OF FORT LARAMIE, THE SNYDER ACT, THE INDIAN HEALTH CARE IMPROVEMENT ACT (IHCIA), AND FEDERAL COMMON LAW, REQUIRED THE GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE COMPETENT PHYSICIAN-LED HEALTHCARE TO THE TRIBE AND ITS MEMBERS, AND TO ENSURE THAT THE HEALTH CARE SERVICES PROVIDED DID NOT FALL BELOW HIGHEST POSSIBLE STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL CARE. REPRESENTED BY MR. BILLION, THE TRIBE OBTAINED A PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN THE U. S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA, AND THE GOVERNMENT APPEALED. IN ROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE V. UNITED STATES, 9 F.4TH 1018 (8TH CIR. 2021), THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT AFFIRMED THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE TRIBE, HOLDING THAT THE UNITED STATES HAD A DUTY TO PROVIDE COMPETENT HEALTH CARE TO THE TRIBE AND ITS MEMBERS, AND THAT THE DUTY TO PROVIDE SUCH "COMPETENT PHYSICIAN-LED HEALTH CARE" WAS SUFFICIENTLY CONCRETE AND SPECIFIC. TIMOTHY BILLION AND HIS TEAM ENGAGED IN BRILLIANT ADVOCACY IN PURSUIT OF A NOBLE GOAL AND SECURED AN OUTSTANDING RESULT. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 2, PART III, LINE 4D | NCJI AWARDED ITS CIVIL JUSTICE SCHOLARSHIP AWARD TO ONE BOOK AND ONE ARTICLE AND RECOGNIZED A SECOND ARTICLE FOR HIGH DISTINCTION. PROFESSOR BENJAMIN ZIPURSKY OF FORDHAM LAW SCHOOL AND PROFESSOR JOHN C.P. GOLDBERG OF HARVARD LAW SCHOOL ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR BOOK "RECOGNIZING WRONGS" (HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2020), IN WHICH THEY EXPLAIN HOW THEIR "CIVIL RECOURSE" CONCEPT MAKES SENSE OF TORT DOCTRINE AND CAPTURES THE WAYS IN WHICH THE LAW OF TORTS CONTRIBUTES TO THE MAINTENANCE OF A JUST POLITY. PROFESSOR DIEGO A. ZAMBRANO OF STANFORD LAW SCHOOL IS RECOGNIZED FOR HIS ARTICLE, "FEDERAL EXPANSION AND THE DECAY OF STATE COURTS", 86 U. CHI. L. REV. 2101 (2019), IN WHICH HE EXPLORES HOW FEDERAL EXPANSION MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE DECAY OF STATE COURTS AND HAS REINFORCED A PLAINTIFF- DEFENDANT DIVERGENCE BETWEEN THE TWO SYSTEMS. HIGH DISTINCTION GOES TO PROFESSOR JONATHAN CARDI (WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW), PROFESSOR VALERIE HANS (CORNELL LAW SCHOOL), AND PROFESSOR GREGORY PARKS (WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW) FOR THEIR ARTICLE, "DO BLACK INJURIES MATTER?: IMPLICIT BIAS AND JURY DECISION MAKING IN TORT CASES", 93 SO. CAL. L. REV. 507 (2020). AFTER CONDUCTING ONE OF THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE EXPERIMENTAL EXAMINATIONS OF HOW RACE AFFECTS JUDGMENTS ON PERSONAL INJURIES, THE AUTHORS FOUND THAT THE DOLLAR AWARDS FOR THE INJURIES SUFFERED BY BLACK PLAINTIFFS IN HYPOTHETICAL CASES WERE LOWER THAN AWARDS FOR THE SAME INJURIES EXPERIENCED BY WHITE PLAINTIFFS. PROFESSORS GOLDBERG, ZAMBRANO, AND ZIPURSKY RECEIVED THEIR AWARDS AT THE NCJI FELLOWS RECEPTION ON SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2023 IN PHOENIX, AZ. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 11B | THE TAX RETURN IS PROVIDED TO THE NATIONAL CIVIL JUSTICE INSTITUTE OFFICERS AND THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW BEFORE FILING. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 15A | THE INSTITUTE'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION IS SET BY THE INSTITUTE'S BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT ITS ANNUAL MEETING. THE TRUSTEES REVIEW THE DIRECTOR'S PERFORMANCE FOR THE PAST YEAR, RELY ON PAST EXPERIENCE WITH PREVIOUS EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS TO DETERMINE A REASONABLE SALARY INCREASE, AND MAKE A WRITTEN RECORD OF THEIR DETERMINATION AND DECISION. |
| FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 17 | MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, NORTH CAROLINA, NORTH DAKOTA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEVADA, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA, UTAH, VIRGINIA, WASHINGTON, DIST OF COLUMBIA |
| FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 19 | THIS MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE TO ALL OFFICERS AND TRUSTEES, BUT IS NOT MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. |
| FORM 990, PART IX, LINE 11G | CONSULTING 50,000 0 0 CONTRACTED LABOR 85,166 7,225 9,229 OTHER PROFESSIONAL 0 14,024 7,551 TOTAL 135,166 21,249 16,780 |
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |