Anatomy in Clay Centers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454958292
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2021
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Loveland, CO, USA
- Phone
- 7205707820
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Biological & Life Sciences
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,763
- Expenses
- $27,408
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RENEE ZAHOUREK (VICE PRESIDENT AND TREASUR)
People named in this filing
- RENEE ZAHOUREK (VICE PRESIDENT AND TREASUR)
- JON ZAHOUREK (DIRECTOR)
- ROGER CLARK ESQ (DIRECTOR (THRU 6/21))
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Anatomy in clay centers exists to expand upon centuries of exploration in human and animal bodies. Anatomy in clay centers firmly believes that exposing individuals to the study of anatomy, and increasing their understanding of how their bodies work, particularly in the context of comparative anatomy, will lead to improved self-confidence and personal health, improved regard and concern for health and wellbeing of other humans, animals and the environment in general, and positive social change in many areas.
What it reported doing in 2021
Aicc focuses heavily on anatomy workshops, which includes workshops on human and dog comparative anatomy, experiential science human anatomy workshop, clay and cadaver, horse anatomy, and the ankle workshop for dancers. These workshops were open to the public at a nominal fee depending on the length of the workshop. However, during 2021 due to the covid-19 pandemic, aicc did not provide any workshops and decided to close its doors and dissolve the entity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 9
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -628.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -27.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -34.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2021
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.