International Center of Medieval Art Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136165508
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2129281146
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$224,968
Expenses
$208,310
Assets
$2,784,409
Liabilities
$39,901

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RYAN FRISINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RYAN FRISINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $79,451 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 promote and support the study, understanding and preservation of visual and material cultures produced primarily between ca. 300 ce and ca. 1500 ce in every corner of the medieval world.

What it reported doing in 2024

The icma remains committed to serving the needs of our membership and the medieval art community at large. Our journal gesta is published in collaboration with the university of chicago press.the icma grants several awards to students: student travel grant which allows graduate students the opportunity to conduct dissertation research, and the student essay prize, which awards a graduate student the best essays (three prizes). For established, contingen, and early career scholars, we offer the icma-kress research and publication grant, which helps with costs involved in publishing a book or research needed to write a book, the icma-kress exhibition grant, which offers money to a museum developing an exhibition in medieval art and can be used to travel research of programming during the run of an exhibition, and the icma annual book prize, awarding an author or authors with the best book in medieval art.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.2%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.37; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.2% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $167K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 29 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.