Kala Art Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942372185
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Berkeley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5408417000
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,444,254
- Expenses
- $1,485,436
- Assets
- $1,930,810
- Liabilities
- $1,053,526
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Perrin Meyer (President)
- Davis Riemer (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Ellen Lake (Executive Dir.): $87,126 total reported compensation
- Mayumi Hamanaka (Artistic Dir.): $86,686 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Kala Art Institute's mission is to help artists sustain their creative work over time through its Artist-in-Residence and Fellowship Programs, and to engage the community through exhibitions, public programs and education.
What it reported doing in 2024
Artist-in-Residence Program: Kala Institute offers an Artist-in-Residence program for artists working in various printmaking techniques, photo-processes, book arts and digital media including video production. Artist residency applications are accepted online three times per year. Considerations for acceptance are conceptual creativity and technical knowledge. Resident artists receive year-round 24-hour access to Kala's facilities and participation in a vital, international artistic community. Fellowships: For over 35 years, Kala Institute has annually awarded artists time, space, and financial support for their work through the Kala Fellowship award. The Kala Fellowship award is an artist residency program accepting applications from artists from the U.S. and around the world. Special initiates include parent artists, public art, media arts, programs for veterans, and more.
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 98% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 60.9%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68% of revenue deployed · 60.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $905K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 20 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.