Culturetrust Greater Philadelphia
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 463109411
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2678753312
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,644,012
- Expenses
- $6,919,562
- Assets
- $4,878,897
- Liabilities
- $695,179
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MELINDA STEFFY (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- ARIEL SHELTON (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MELINDA STEFFY (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $110,771 total reported compensation
- ARIEL SHELTON (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $109,290 total reported compensation
- TAILINH AGOYO (DIRECTOR (UNTIL JULY 2024)): $71,760 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Culturetrust's mission is to provide a charitable home and shared management resources for fiscally sponsored projects in the arts, culture, heritage and social impact sectors.
What it reported doing in 2024
Fiscal sponsorship: culturetrust (the "trust") is an independent charitable trust managed by cultureworks greater philadelphia. In fy25, the trust served as the legal, financial, and administrative home for 99 fiscally sponsored projects across the arts, culture, heritage, and social impact sectors. Projects share the trust's nonprofit status and receive management resources and back-office support from cultureworks, the trust administrator, which allows projects to increase operational efficiency in support of their own missions. The trust does not run its own programming; all revenues and expenses are related to the activities of fiscally sponsored projects themselves. The trust and trust administrator steward project funds and ensure compliance with charitable guidelines.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.4%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $108.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.4% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 15 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $743K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 37 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 12 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.