Chatham Arts Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561621611
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Pittsboro, NC, USA
Phone
9195420394
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$537,025
Expenses
$392,216
Assets
$380,548
Liabilities
$4,341

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHERYL CHAMBLEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • GILDA MCDANIEL (PRESIDENT)
  • HEATHER BUSTER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHERYL CHAMBLEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $90,741 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Chatham arts council inc inspires creative expressions that celebrate the countys heritage and identity through cultural activities and other programs that make chatham county a vibrant place to live and visit. Chatham county arts council nurtures creative thinkers

What it reported doing in 2024

Arts for resilient kids: coordinated, scheduled, and managed artists-in-schools residences at various chatham county schools; coordinated, scheduled, and managed clydefest annual kids outdoor arts festival. Investing in artists: coordinated, scheduled, and managed meet this artist and go see this features; coordinated, interviewed, paneled, and awarded funds in grassroots grants; coordinated, interviewed, and awarded funds in individual artist commissions

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.3%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 52.5%; rating input score 52; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.3% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $334K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.