Institute for Public Architecture Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271515906
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2122199931
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $292,733
- Expenses
- $313,037
- Assets
- $19,438
- Liabilities
- $43,132
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JONATHAN KIRSCHENFELD (PRESIDENT &)
People named in this filing
- ANDY BERNHEIMER (SECRETARY &)
- TOM BISHOP (DIRECTOR)
- STEVEN CRAINER (DIRECT/LEGAL)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
1. To promote and develop interest in urban research, design and architectual projects that benefit the general public. 2. To provide assistance and advice to governments and organizations described in sction 501(c)(3) of the code, or corresponding section in the future federal tax code, on architectual projects that benefit underserved communities. 3. To establish a residency for practicing architects and individuals studying architecture to foster and develop interest in urban research, design and architectual projects that benefit the general public. 4. To render financial assistance to any organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code, that promotes urban research, design and architectural projects that benefit the public.
What it reported doing in 2024
The mission of the ipa fellows residency program is four-fold: 1) support architects and designers working in the public interest, 2) engage designers to effect policy changes, 3) create opportunities for designers to be engaged in solving specific urban issues, and 4) engage designers and community members through discourse on pressing issues through public programming.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 3
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 24
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 2.2%; rating input score 2
- Program expense ratio: 2%; rating input score 2
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- 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: -6.9%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.22; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 2.2% of revenue deployed · 2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.