Association of Independent Creative Editors Inc C/o Aicp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133992667
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9179026063
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$595,783
Expenses
$568,001
Assets
$21,933
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG DUNCAN (PRESIDENT)
  • RACHELLE MADDENEMERALD CITIES STUDI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LARUE ANDERSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHELLE MADDENEMERALD CITIES STUDI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $180,000 total reported compensation
  • DAVID ROSEN (COUNSEL): $8,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Aice's mission is to advance and promote the editorial, design, audio and visual effects industries and to be an advocate for their editors, designers and artists and the significant role they play in the ever-changing media creation process. Aice facilitates dialogue on critical industry issues with agencies, advertisers and suppliers, and serves as a uniquely qualified educational resource to the marketing communications industry.

What it reported doing in 2017

Membership dues - aice is an international trade association whose members are independent editorial, design, audio and visual effects companies. With chapters in atlanta, chicago, detroit, los angeles, minneapolis, New York, san francisco, Texas, and toronto, aice member companies and their editors, designers and artists are a significant and influential segment of the marketing communications industry.general membership is open to independent editorial, design, audio and visual effects companies not owned in whole or in part by advertisers or advertising agencies. Associate membership is available to companies which provide goods and services to aice member companies. Total aice membership includes over 115 editorial, design and visual effects companies and a growing number of associate members. Aice members represent a significant and influential segment of the advertising and marketing communications industry and aice is leading its members through a period of unprecedented change and opportunity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48% of revenue deployed · 50.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.