Mak Center for Art and Architecture La

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205101447
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
West Hollywood, CA, USA
Phone
3236511510
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,407,519
Expenses
$1,406,618
Assets
$2,877,134
Liabilities
$45,147

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BETH STRYKER (Direct/Curator): $100,000 total reported compensation
  • ANGELICA FUENTES (SECRETARY / CFO): $70,540 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 mak center serves to educate the public about architecture, art and experimental thought on topics that relate to space along the public-private continuum. Launched as a satellite institution to the mak in vienna, its mission is to further public understanding of space as it relates to visual culture.

What it reported doing in 2025

Costs to maintain and conserve the historic Home and Studio of noted modern architect R.M. Schindler (built 1922), to present exhibitions, publications, and public programs related to experimental practices in art and architecture, and to conduct public architecture tours in the city at large.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.