Foundation for Contemporary Arts Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131978163
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2128077077
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,337,330
Expenses
$3,136,109
Assets
$55,356,112
Liabilities
$1,226,324

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH K TAKEDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH K TAKEDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $270,028 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN FLYNN (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $175,299 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 encourage, sponsor, and promote innovative work in the arts created and presented by individuals, groups, and organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Creative research grants administration: creative research grants of $10,000 are awarded by fca to support critical exploratory phases of the artistic process. Launched in 2024, the program is made possible by a generous bequest from the estate of margo leavin. Fca invites prior recipients of emergency grants to apply for activities that would inform and enhance their artistic practice over an 18-month period. Applications are reviewed by staff for eligibility and subsequently reviewed by an artist panel in two phases to select the recipients. Recipients sign a grant agreement and are asked to submit a final report upon the conclusion of funded activities, describing how they used their grant and its impact. The resulting $300,000 in creative research grants were awarded in january 2025 and do not appear in the grant total.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 35th 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: 27.7%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.65; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.2% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $270K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.