Elisabeth Jones Art Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861194522
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5032864959
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$377,868
Expenses
$393,809
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHANDRA GLAESEMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHANDRA GLAESEMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $85,525 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ejac is an art center committed to the development of an extensive range of art programs to advocate for the environmental health of our planet and social justice for all people.

What it reported doing in 2024

As an ancillary objective in line with our mission, parallax employs artists from non-traditional and marginalized backgrounds and provides professional development opportunities through a granting program. This year those grants contributed to two artists being able to go to month-long residencies, one in Vermont and one in mexico city while also receiving paid time off to pursue professional growth. Parallax art center created educational programming and opportunities for k-12 students in multnomah county and collaborated with schools to introduce these exhibits free of charge to children.continued on schedule oparallax art center centered black and indigenous voices through a granting program that allowed artists to create and exhibit work, hold workshops and community events, document work in the whitney biennial, hold healing events at the art center as well as present their work for the first time in a professional gallery setting.as an ancillary objective in line with our mission, parallax employs artists from non-traditional and marginalized backgrounds and provides professional development opportunities through a granting program. This year those grants contributed to two artists being able to go to month-long residencies, one in Vermont and one in mexico city while also receiving paid time off to pursue professional growth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.1%; rating input score 89; 51st 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -105.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.1% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $295K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.