College Art Association of America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131671148
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126911051
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,714,749
Expenses
$3,609,515
Assets
$12,221,921
Liabilities
$1,444,955

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENISE BAXTER (PRESIDENT)
  • ISIMEME OMOGBAI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ISIMEME OMOGBAI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CEO): $297,337 total reported compensation
  • MAEGHAN DONOHUE (SR DIRECTOR, ENG STRATEGY & CHIEF OF STAFF): $184,304 total reported compensation
  • PRAKASH KOLLURI (DIRECTOR OF FIN & ADMIN, CONTROLLER): $142,822 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The college art association (caa), as the preeminent international leadership organization in the visual arts, promotes these arts and their understanding through advocacy, intellectual engagement, and a commitment to the diversity of practices and practitioners.

What it reported doing in 2024

Art bulletin: the art bulletin founded in 1913 is a quarterly dedicated to scholarly articles and reviews of books in all periods of art history. Four issues were mailed to approximately 3,200 members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 74%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.2%; rating input score 79; 21st 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.39; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 74% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 11 filed program accomplishments · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $297K · 34 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.