Alliance for California Traditional Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020541202
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5592379812
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,476,491
Expenses
$5,629,669
Assets
$6,619,595
Liabilities
$1,345,370

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chike Nwoffiah (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Amy Kitchener (Executive Dir.): $145,681 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

ACTA's mission is to ensure that California's future holds California's past. ACTA promotes and supports ways for cultural traditions to thrive now and into the future by providing advocacy, resources, and connections for folk and traditional artists.

What it reported doing in 2024

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation CARES program leverages ACTA's long and deep experience of our existing programming inside correctional facilities to combine specific artists, art forms, and healing interventions in a single 16-week program consisting of four interconnected modules led by traditional artists. The art forms and artists that ACTA has been bringing inside prisons since 2014 come from many of the same neighborhoods as their students. They understand that the threat of incarceration is not far removed from their realities, their families, and their friends. At the same time, ACTAs teaching artists are masters of their forms. They are invested in practices that have transformed them and recognize the possibilities of transformation for those currently impacted by the system of incarceration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -61.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $146K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $209K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.