Maryland Art Place Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521210213
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4109628565
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Visual Arts Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$573,020
Expenses
$439,401
Assets
$598,825
Liabilities
$773,022

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY ROYCE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DOUG KOSCHALK (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY ROYCE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $104,297 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Maryland art place was established to develop and maintain an environment for artists to exhibit their work and facilitate exchanges between artists and the public through educational leadership.

What it reported doing in 2024

Maryland arts place map inspires, supports, and encourages artistic expression through innovative programming, exhibitions, and educational opportunities while recognizing the powerful impact art can have on our community. Map creates a dynamic environment for artists of our time to engage with the public by nurturing and promoting new ideas. Map has served as a critical resource in the mid-atlantic area since 1981. Map primarily supports emerging and mid-career visual artists often providing a vital foundation for art students entering the workforce by bridging the gap between commercial galleries and museums. On average, map directly serves approximately 500-600 artists, and indirectly serves closer to 3,000 individual artisrs each year. Maps role as the caretaker of the Maryland state arts directory plays a significant role in our reach and focus on Maryland based artists.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 23.3%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.29; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $304K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.