Chashama Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133862422
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2123918151
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,318,289
Expenses
$2,381,504
Assets
$1,762,634
Liabilities
$1,248,842

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANITA DURST (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARC DALE (DIRECTOR): $53,927 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Since 1995, chashama has revitalized over 90 properties, providing invaluable opportunities to more than 12,000 artists. Chashama empowers artists at any stage of their career with affordable space to create and present. Chashama also brings vibrant, artistic programming to audiences of all ages and backgrounds by annually presenting over 130 free, public events to diverse neighborhoods throughout New York city. Chashamas workspace program provides low-cost artist studios in a professionally, supportive, creative environment. Our presentation program helps artists fully realize their creative visions through exhibition and performance space. With professional development workshops, visiting curator opportunities, and financial, logistical and marketing support, we invest in artists, increasing their prospects for success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Space to present provides free presentation spaces to performers, visual artists, and curators. In fy25 we provided 678 artists with the opportunity to present 266 events in professional, highly visible venues throughout New York. Our program nurtures excellence in the presentation of innovative, culturally diverse art and expands the publics access to quality artistic presentation.

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 90% 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 50.6%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 50.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.