Boston Public Art Triennial Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042712823
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6179823860
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,324,142
Expenses
$3,484,448
Assets
$3,740,493
Liabilities
$426,902

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHERINE GILBERT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHERINE GILBERT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $147,966 total reported compensation
  • LEO CROWLEY (PROJECT AND EXHIBITIONS DIRECTOR): $116,129 total reported compensation
  • MARGUERITE WYNTER (DIR. OF PARTNERSHIPS AND ENGAGEMENT): $114,451 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To foster relationships between artists and the public to create bold public art experiences that open minds, conversations, and spaces across boston, resulting in a more open, equitable, and vibrant city.

What it reported doing in 2024

The public art accelerator is a skill-building and grant-funding program designed to support early-to-mid-career boston-based artists in creating temporary public art projects in one of boston's neighborhoods. Artists who demonstrate need and interest in creating object-based works for boston received training in the skills (e.g., budgeting, project management) and sensibilities (e.g., consensus-building, empathy, ability to communicate a vision and involve others clearly) to succeed in the dynamic field of public art. Cohort-model workshops support the development of these skills. Four artists were selected to participate in approximately 14 workshops led by the triennial's curatorial and production team, alongside diverse workshop instructors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.5% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $148K · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $479K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.