Greater Baltimore Cultural Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260010594
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4102300200
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,059,883
Expenses
$878,252
Assets
$504,419
Liabilities
$173,928

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN APPERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • CARLA DU PREE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEANNIE HOWE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEANNIE HOWE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $155,130 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Founded in 2001, gbca is a leading nonprofit provider of services to artists and cultural organizations in the region. (see schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2024

A history of equity, inclusion, and anti-racism work: celebrating its 10th anniversary, urban arts leadership (ual) has been the flagship program of the greater baltimore cultural alliance's equity and inclusion efforts. Ual serves as a career pipeline for emerging leaders from backgrounds that are underrepresented, particularly those of color, in the cultural workforce. Having deep experience in developing and operating ual, gbca is uniquely positioned to respond to the current economic and social upheavals exacerbated by the covid 19 pandemic and racial injustice. Working to address systemic barriers to equity in the cultural workforce, the program also focuses on tools and training for participating host cultural organizations aimed at strengthening their ability to successfully recruit, hire, and retain a more diverse workforce. Gbca received renewed support from the national endowment for the arts to deepen the work of the ual through its groundbreaking field school. The field school teaches the practices of folklorists as a means for artists and cultural organizations to engage authentically and respectfully in community-based programming. The first phase of this project, beauty beneath the blight, focused on the stories of Pennsylvania avenue in baltimore city. Skills developed by fellows through the field school are replicable and carried with each into their respective placements and throughout their careers. Partners for this initiative include the library of congress and the smithsonian institute folklife center. Importantly, over the past ten years ual alumni have launched exciting careers and are putting their commitment to justice and their training to work. Organizations who have benefited by hiring alumni include the Maryland state arts council, the national museum for women in the arts, Maryland citizens for the arts, Maryland volunteer lawyers for the arts, greater baltimore cultural alliance, and many more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.6%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.6% of revenue deployed · 53.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $472K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.