Association of Tribal Archives Libraries & Museums

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273853278
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4054019657
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,624,180
Expenses
$1,402,664
Assets
$4,879,340
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • B Susan Feller (President & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Leticia Chambers (Board Member)
  • Kevin Gover (Board Member)
  • W Richard West Jr (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Association of Tribal Archives, Libraries, and Museums (ATALM) supports the work of Indigenous cultural institutions, provides culturally relevant programming and services, and promotes Indigenous cultural sovereignty.

What it reported doing in 2024

General ATALM Programming ATALM programs include 1. Strengthening Institutional Support for Native Artists (SISNA) is a national effort to ensure Native artists and culture bearers have the recognition, resources, and opportunities they need to thrive; 2. Doris Duke Native Oral History Project which connect Indigenous communities to oral history materials found in seven different universities across the country; 3. Going Home: Returning Material Culture to Native Communities which helps collecting institutions and individuals repatriate significan items to their contemporary Indigenous cultures; 4. Improving Digital Inclusion and Broadband Infrastructure in Native Communities supports the digital inclusion and broadband infrastructure needs of tribal libraries; 5. Community Impact Awards which was began to foster a greater appreication and support for Native cultural institutions.

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 92% 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

STRONG - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.1%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $251.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 23rd 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.5%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.48; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.1% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $125K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.