Arts Angle
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861349907
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Louisville, KY, USA
- Phone
- 5028870135
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Culture, and Humanities N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $21,732
- Expenses
- $23,416
- Assets
- $46,320
- Liabilities
- $595
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Elizabeth Kramer (Execuitve Director): $5,000 total reported compensation
- Francis Ward-Simmons (Officer): $500 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Arts Angle prepares Louisville-area youth from diverse backgrounds for success by providing access to the arts and empowering them to use their voices to create arts journalism that engages the community. This happens in free after-school programs where high school-aged participants learn about arts culture and civic life by interviewing researching writing editing and publishing original stories.
What it reported doing in 2025
Workshops: Arts Angle conducted workshops spanning several weeks for high school students. The sessions included discussions on art and theater history attending arts events and writing about them. Participants received mentorship for editing and polishing their pieces which were then published on the Arts Angle website and in Louisville publications. The workshops covered touring productions of & Juliet and Moulin Rouge! The Musical. Additionally the organization held the HeARTStories workshop at Louisvilles Home of the Innocents providing photography instruction and guided writing for young female residents. The program included outings to theater and orchestra performances a parade gallery demonstrations and interviews with artists. Participants documented their experiences through photography and writing.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.7%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 69.7% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 38 of 41 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.