Arts Education in Maryland Schools Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522056349
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4108375500
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Service Organizations and Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$946,831
Expenses
$819,681
Assets
$430,424
Liabilities
$52,135

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL MCGRAIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHEL MCGRAIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $96,030 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

All Maryland public school students have equitable access to arts education so that they can learn and achieve in and through dance, media arts, music, theatre, and visual arts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Baltimore county justice in education table: (expenses: $6,720; revenue: $1,000), description: bcejt was founded in 2022 to advocate and organize for solutions to ongoing operational, cultural, and funding inequities within the baltimore county public school system. The bcejt is a local community-labor coalition comprised of the following organizations.annual conferences: (expenses: $1,092; revenue: $2,300), description: by providing policy updates and advocacy trainings, aems's conference presentations equip Maryland's public school arts educators, teaching artists, and members of the arts education ecosystem to advocate for equitable access to arts education in Maryland's public schools

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 13.4%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $526K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 56/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.