Asian Arts Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232827657
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2155570455
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,647,988
Expenses
$2,641,349
Assets
$7,664,202
Liabilities
$115,076

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Matt Nelson (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $109,823 total reported compensation
  • DAVE KYU (Interim ED (EFF. 8/15/24)): $103,389 total reported compensation
  • Anne Ishii (Former ED (Thru. 8/15/24)): $71,619 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The asian arts initiative is a community-based arts center in philadelphia that engages artists and everyday people to create art that explores the diverse experiences of asian americans, addresses our social context, imagines and affects positive community change.

What it reported doing in 2024

The asian arts initiative offers performances, exhibitions, workshops and training for artists, youth and adults who share its mission of community based arts. The asian arts initiative is a unique and vital civic space where artists and everyday people can think critically about the experiences of asian americans in philadelphia. It is a meeting place for people who lack access to mainstream media, education and arts because of barriers of language, culture, race and money. It serves a diverse constituency of asian immigrants, asian americans born in the us and non asians who come together to give voice to their experiences, raise awareness of issues facing them and imagine their collective possibilities for social change.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 49.2%; rating input score 49; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -60.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.9; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $110K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 49/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.