Afro-latin Jazz Alliance of New York Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453665976
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2015
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126743500
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Music Groups, Bands, Ensembles

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,050,563
Expenses
$4,440,147
Assets
$4,566,056
Liabilities
$864,383

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIETTA ULACIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ARTURO O'FARRILL (DIRECTOR & ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $232,522 total reported compensation
  • MARIETTA ULACIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $183,944 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA THOMPSON (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $123,848 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The afro latin jazz alliance's mission is to preserve the music and heritage of big band latin jazz, an important cultural treasure. This mission is accomplished through performance and institutional support for the afro latin jazz orchestra, education of young musicians and new audiences, and maintenance of a library of latin jazz musical scores and recordings.

What it reported doing in 2024

-education teaching young musicians the principles of music and the significance of culture in a setting of mutual respect and understanding.-performances bringing latin jazz to various sites in New York and around the country by providing a series of concerts and performances.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $93.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $233K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $799K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.