ArtsAVL

Legal name: Asheville Area Arts Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581371546
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
(828) 222-0436
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Council/Agency

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,313,764
Expenses
$2,473,239
Assets
$1,271,837
Liabilities
$33,907

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATIE CORNELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATIE CORNELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY): $85,084 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Advocacy is a core part of ArtsAVL's mission. As Buncombe County's nonprofit arts council, we work to ensure that arts and culture are recognized as essential to our community's vitality, economy, and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy programs - in fy25, artsavl advanced its leadership in cultural planning and policy by laying the groundwork for buncombe county's first cultural recovery plan, a comprehensive 20262030 roadmap to rebuild a stronger and more resilient arts ecosystem after hurricane helene. To support data-driven advocacy, artsavl launched several major research initiatives, including cultural asset mapping, a creative economy report, and studies examining the music industry and the craft supply chain in western North Carolina. During this period, artsavl was also contracted by the North Carolina arts council to serve as the point person for arts recovery across western North Carolina, coordinating regional needs, supporting local creatives, and ensuring that the arts were fully represented in both immediate recovery efforts and long-term planning discussions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $75.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th 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: 56.6%; rating input score 57; 16th 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: 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: 25.4%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 10 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 71.2% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 36 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.