Cleveland Arts Prize

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010627754
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
South Euclid, OH, USA
Phone
2163210012
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$413,853
Expenses
$296,608
Assets
$865,837
Liabilities
$23,194

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • EFTIHIA TSENGAS (EXECUTIVE DI): $58,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The cleveland arts prize identifies, rewards, publicly honors and promotes those creative artists whose original work and accomplishments have set a standard of excellence to which other artists can aspire. Additionally, the cleveland arts prize recognizes the contributions of individuals and organizations that have expanded the community's participation in the arts and helped make the region more hospitable to creative artistic expression.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cleveland arts prize ("cap") continues to deepen its impact on the region's arts and culture community through meaningful programming, generous support for artists, and community engagement. Cap hosted its 64th annual awards event on october 24, 2024, at cuyahoga community college's east campus, recognizing outstanding achievement in the arts. Cap awarded three unrestricted 10,000 prizes to artists in the emerging, mid-career, and lifetime achievement categories across various artistic disciplines. In addition, five 2,000 verge fellowships will be awarded to pre-emerging artists in cuyahoga county, offering both financial support and professional development opportunities. Cap also continues to invest in the future of the arts by awarding scholarships to high school and college students through partnerships with area schools. In its commitment to convening and connecting the arts community, cap has introduced a new series of tours of performing arts venues, offering opportunities for cap supporters, trustees, and the public to engage directly with local artistic directors and performers who are cleveland arts prize winners. This initiative has strengthened ties across disciplines and created platforms for dynamic conversation and collaboration. Cap's reach and influence have expanded through strategic board development, growing the board of trustees to 25 members, bringing new perspectives and resources to the organization. As cap looks ahead, it remains dedicated to honoring the region's most accomplished artists, uplifting the next generation of creatives, and enhancing cultural vibrancy across northeast Ohio.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.4%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.3%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.92; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.4% of revenue deployed · 68.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $202K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $58K · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.