MADI World Art Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752950156
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2148557802
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Art Museums

Reported finances

Revenue
$138,334
Expenses
$122,372
Assets
$1,302,555
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Chooljian (President)
  • Evan Stone (Vice President Gala Committee)

People named in this filing

  • Andrew Chooljian (President)
  • Evan Stone (Vice President Gala Committee)
  • Wilmer D Masterson (Secretary/Bldg Committee)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Museum educates the community about MADI art and 20th and 21st century geometric art through art workshops for students and seniors, through Arcadia Salon discussions, and by having four temporary exhibits yearly that include both local and international artists. The MADI art movement began in South America, so the permanent collection prominently features Latino artists, but has many regional, European, Japanese and Russian artists as well.

What it reported doing in 2020

The MADI World Art Foundation provides art exhibits, art education and art outreach programs to the residents of Dallas, Texas and surrounding communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $74.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 11th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 11.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.64; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $111K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2020
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.