KultureCity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463701145
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Vestavia Hills, AL, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,863,115
Expenses
$6,758,154
Assets
$12,079,565
Liabilities
$9,935,757

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • UMA SRIVASTAVA (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • UMA SRIVASTAVA (Executive Director): $100,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Organization's mission is to create a world where individuals with invisible disabilities, and their families are accepted, included, and treated equally. We do this via education, training, and providing tools and resources to the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Sensory initiative: The main goal of the sensory initiative is to provide training to public venues such as sporting arenas, museums, zoos, libraries and resturants across many sectors including but not limited to arts, music, sports, dining and more to make them inclusive at all times to individuals with invisible disabilities, such as those with autism, PTSD, dementia and more. We provide sensory training and education which includes methods to recognize a guest who needs assistance, as well as more effective methods of communication and engagement. We also provide sensory tools such as headphones, fidget tools, weighted lap pads and feeling charts.We create safe spaces like sensory rooms to be used by individuals experiencing sensory overload.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.5%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st 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: 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: 23.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 38% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.5% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 29 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.