Otis College of Art and Design
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 132981115
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, US
- Phone
- 800-527-OTIS
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Higher Education Institutions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $82,349,569
- Expenses
- $84,921,122
- Assets
- $128,249,327
- Liabilities
- $43,842,643
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
44 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARLES J HIRSCHHORN (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- CHARLES J HIRSCHHORN (PRESIDENT): $539,589 total reported compensation
- ANKUSH M MAHINDRA (VP, FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION): $297,115 total reported compensation
- ALLISON B GRAFF-WEISNER (VP, INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT): $228,624 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Otis College of Art and Design is a not-for-profit educational institution that thrives on the support of our generous donors. When you make a tax-deductible gift, you can direct your contribution to any department or program that you choose.
What it reported doing in 2024
Otis college of art and design prepares diverse students of art and design to enrich our world through their creativity, skill, and vision. The college provides an interdisciplinary education serving approximately 1,179 full-time students, awarding accredited bfa degrees in architecture/landscape/interiors, communication arts, digital media, fashion design, fine arts, product design, and toy design, as well as mfa degrees in fine arts, graphic design, and writing. Otis also offers continuing education and certificate programs supporting personal and professional development.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $71.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $540K · 44 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 22 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.