Creative Washtenaw

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260638491
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7343959868
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Council/Agency

Reported finances

Revenue
$222,447
Expenses
$263,859
Assets
$74,343
Liabilities
$197,666

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Deb Polich (President-CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Deb Polich (President-CEO): $46,136 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advocate for and provide support services to artists creative workers organizations businesses educational and government entities to ensure that Washtenaw County Michigan - the greater Ann Arbor area - remains a great place for all to create live work learn play and visit.

What it reported doing in 2024

Creative Washtenaw plays a vital role in supporting local artists by overseeing government grants which are pivotal in nurturing a dynamic creative environment. Through the management of grant initiatives and the provision of essential connections to valuable resources Creative Washtenaw empowers artists to embark on projects that contribute significantly to the cultural richness of the region. This proactive approach not only benefits individual artists but also enhances the overall artistic vibrancy and diversity of the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.3%; rating input score 84; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -18.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.66; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 74.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $197K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $104K reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 43 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • 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.