Amant Foundation USA
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 834140659
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Phone
- 6467157166
- Rating
- 33
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,462,077
- Expenses
- $5,214,700
- Assets
- $22,721,026
- Liabilities
- $23,795,348
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Nicholas Pilato (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Nicholas Pilato (Executive Director): $252,669 total reported compensation
- Tobi Maeir (Artistic Director): $172,188 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission is to support artists with a residency program where we provide studios to artists with a stipend to live and to exhibit works for viewing by the public of shows created for artists that would otherwise not be able to show in New York City while also supporting other worthy organizations aligned with our mission.
What it reported doing in 2025
All of the expenditures are towards the support of the programs at Amant Arts
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 37
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -256.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.36; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 38.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 63.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 37 of 42 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
- 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 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.