Nova Prism Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 922161431
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- McLean, VA, USA
- Phone
- 5714859308
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- LGBT Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $88,090
- Expenses
- $73,605
- Assets
- $25,862
- Liabilities
- $4,221
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Leon van der Goetz (Executive Director)
- Laura White (President)
People named in this filing
- Leon van der Goetz (Executive Director)
- Laura White (President)
- Jordan Moskal (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To educate the public about LGBTQ equality, to provide services to support the LGBTQ community, and to undertake other charitable projects, programs, and activities not inconsistent with section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code and applicable state law.
What it reported doing in 2025
NoVA Prism Center maintained a creative makerspace for a community of over 200 active LGBTQ+ participants, to support creative exploration and self-expression through a variety of artistic pursuits. Through Makerspace workshops, NoVA Prism Center served over 150 members of the public, teaching valuable creative skills for expression and resilience.
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 99% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 31
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 29.4%; rating input score 29
- Program expense ratio: 35.2%; rating input score 35
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.4%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 29.4% of revenue deployed · 35.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $26K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.