Hand Print Workshop

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521780514
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7035996655
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,362
Expenses
$14,254
Assets
$497,508
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Jay Kreuger (Board member)
  • Jane Manstof (board member)
  • Dennis O'Neil (Creative Director)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Collaborative artist studio assisting in creation of screen prints with both emerging and accomplished local, national and international artists. Benefit to the community is the knowledge gained from personal exposure to these artists and their projects. In addition, student interns and apprentices contribute to and benefit from involvement as well. Numerous Corcoran college students assisted with preparing Bill Christenberry's print, an event of national significance.

What it reported doing in 2015

2015 we became more involved with various student groups by partnering with the ARC and the Sackler Museum to revisit whistlers, "Peacock Room." This 2 month project was sponsored by the Sackler. Our responsibility was entirely making available to the students our professional abilities in helping them learn about the professional possibilities screen printing has to offer when coupled with painting, sculpture and photography. Other collaborative projects involved partnering with grad photo students from Afghanistan to create a series of highly personal prints related to the homeland. In each case it was our knowledge and experience that contributed to the project. Besides myself, 4 advanced level Corcoran students took active parts in teaching and guiding the process and idea generation. Very little of our financial resources were needed except for repairing screens

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 34.9; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $27K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.