Central Arts Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860712649
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6222543100
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,266,517
- Expenses
- $1,399,515
- Assets
- $242,892
- Liabilities
- $271,982
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Angelique Kane (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Angelique Kane (Executive Director): $18,615 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Phoenix Center for the Arts provides arts and culture opportunities for all through education, programming and advocacy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Central Arts Alliance (CAA) provided accessible, high-quality arts education and cultural programming at two campuses (Phoenix Center for the Arts in downtown Phoenix and Thunderbird Arts Center in north Phoenix). Across both sites, CAA offered 230+ classes annually in ceramics, painting, glass arts, drawing, photography, jewelry and metals, piano, guitar, dance, and youth arts. More than 3,500 students participated in these programs each year, representing diverse communities across Metro Phoenix. Participation grew, supported by targeted outreach such as CAAs BIPOC Arts Program, which expanded access for historically underrepresented artists and learners. CAA also operated a downtown community theater that hosted 150+ events annually, including dance, theater, music, film, and lecture programming. By providing low-cost, high-quality production space and partnering with 50+ nonprofit organizations, CAA reduced financial barriers to arts engagement and strengthened cultural equity in Phoenix. Mission-aligned events regularly received donated theater space and production support, increasing accessibility for community groups and emerging artists. Facilities & Capital Improvements (FY25): During FY25, CAA completed a major revitalization of the Third St Theater, funded through $1.194 million from the City of Phoenix General Obligation (GO) Bond Program. Improvements included a new LED house lighting plot, an updated professional sound system, a modern projection system, new stage curtains and drapery, new audience seating, a professional broadcast camera system, and a fully modernized technical booth. The Greenroom was fully renovated, and a new ADA lift was installed to ensure accessible stage entry for performers and guests. A new digital outdoor marquee was added on the high? visibility downtown corridor to increase exposure for community arts programming. More than 15 vendors and contractors contributed to this project. CAA also launched the Black Box at Third St Theater, transforming a previously unused storage space into an intimate, flexible venue with seating for approximately 75 guests, equipped with a full lighting plot and QSC sound system. The Black Box expanded opportunities for small theater companies, workshops, podcasts, comedy, and emerging performing artists. Expansion of Resident Organizations (FY25): Phoenix Center for the Arts expanded its resident nonprofit community with the following additions: Reflection Church, which held weekly Sunday services in the Theater and Black Box. School of Hip Hop (SOHH), which offered youth programs in music, dance, DJ skills, and creative arts. New Empire Entertainment, a Black? owned media production and photography collective. Grey Box Collective, which produced interdisciplinary, experimental work exploring social issues affecting college? age communities. These organizations strengthened the campus as a diverse, collaborative hub for creative expression and community engagement. Volunteer & Patron Services Impact: CAA engaged 35 volunteers during FY25. Volunteers supported special events, assisted Facilities with setup and logistics, and helped secure studios and classrooms for instructors and students. Patron Services increased on? site visibility, strengthened customer service support, and improved guest experience across both campuses.
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 99% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 17
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -10.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.12; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $19K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.