Can Art Change the World? Foundation

Legal name: Can Art Change the World Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824418709
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6462865251
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,205,086
Expenses
$1,233,489
Assets
$10,045,337
Liabilities
$491,848

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNA VERGHESE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SOL GUY (DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL HANIA (DIRECTOR)
  • JANE ROSENTHAL (DIRECTOR)

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

Inspired by the work and legacy of artist JR, the Can Art Change the World? Foundation harnesses the power of art to unite and support communities worldwide. We fund and create educational and artistic programs that nurture personal growth, promote community healing, and incite social change through art.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other projects and program expenses $332426 other grants & special projects total: $86081 a) college citoyen de france $43,700 a) 2024 ukraine combat art iop kyiv $19,880 b) cactw switzerland $22,501 other program service costs $246,345 a) 138 grand st building expenses (60% of total) $79,016 b) bank fees $333 c) depreciation and amortization (pro-rated) $148,487 d) legal and professional fees $7,130 e) insurance $7,379 f) consulting -curriculum development $4,000

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.14; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 41.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.