Foundation for World Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954746675
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Manhattan Beach, CA, USA
Phone
3108712648
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,852
Expenses
$118,367
Assets
$180,434
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Judith Mitoma (President)

People named in this filing

  • Judith Mitoma (President)
  • Andrew Beath (Treasurer)
  • Jodie Evans (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Foundation for World Arts is a Los Angeles based dedicated to presenting public concerts/events featuring international and diverse USA artists. We nurture cultural exchange, tolerance, understanding, and education by representing our multicultural world. Over the years, the Foundation has brought together tens of thousands of people of diverse ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds by presenting performing artists of from Asia, Africa, Europe, Pacific Islands and the Middle East. The World Festival of Sacred Music-Los Angeles 1999-2011 launched our efforts. In 2011 we toured 36 island peoples to perform in 15 University and Public theaters across the USA. In 2014-2017 FWA began a new partnership with the Japanese American Cultural and Community Center, the ARATANI WORLD SERIES (AWS) a world concert series. Since 2007 to the present FWA has toured Gamelan Cudamani in the USA and organized study programs in Bali. In 2020- present we offer grant support for Cudamani Educatio program.

What it reported doing in 2025

FWA provides core support for Cudamani Education program. With enrollments of 350 students age 6-19 we support 18 classes of gamelan and dance each week. FWA grants offer direct support of the teaching staff. A total of 18 teachers offer classes at the highest professional level. Our grants support the core administrative staff that manage classes, coordinate faculty, organize special student recitals and other special events. While teaching facilities are provided by gamelan Cudamani, FWA support insures the maintenance of facilities, replacement and repair of instruments, and the purchase of dance costumes. Repair and rennovation of facilities insure teaching space is safe and well maintained .

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $101K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.