National Center for Creative Aging

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870805049
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028959456
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Geriatrics

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$527,658
Expenses
$809,885
Assets
$323,111
Liabilities
$89,436

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LINDA NOEKLER (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHLEEN KELLY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GAY HANNA MERRILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • GAY HANNA MERRILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The national center for creative aging (ncca) is dedicated to fostering an understanding of the vital relationship between creative expression and the quality of life of older people. Creative expression is important for older people of all cultures and ethnic backgrounds, regardless of economic status, age, or level of physical, emotional, or cognitive functioning.

What it reported doing in 2014

Capacity buildingncca provides workshops that help develop new skills in grantwriting, community partnership development, and arts programming. Ncca also promotes the networking of individuals and organizations that are dedicated to promoting creative expression later in life.

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -53.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $710K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.