Pittsburgh International Folk Arts Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474443871
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4122242071
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$531,598
Expenses
$585,214
Assets
$1,087,447
Liabilities
$53,817

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charles Cubelic (President)
  • Alyssa Bushunow (Executive Director)
  • Bronco Brnardic (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • George Kresovich (Artistic Director): $40,000 total reported compensation
  • Alyssa Bushunow (Executive Director): $38,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Preserves & celebrates international cultural heritages through artistic performance while awarding talented performers scholarships to Pittsburgh-based universities for their contributions & dedication to the arts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community Workshops & Educational Engagement: Through hands-on workshops, the mission is extended beyond the stage by inviting non-traditional audiences & community members to actively engage with folk arts. These programs demystify cultural traditions & make them accessible through participatory learning experiences, including dance instruction, vocal traditions, & culinary arts. Past offerings have included Ukranian egg decorating (pysanky), Croatian streudel making, & Hungarian folk dance - creating welcoming entry points that foster cultural appreciation, intergenerational learning, & community connection. All workshops have different capacities based on the type of craft being taught & the resources available. A recent Croatian Strudel Making workshop was sold out at 36 attendees + the Hungarian workshop averaged 25 attendees.

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 91% 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 - 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86%; rating input score 86; 36th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.1%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.86; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.3%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.8% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $487K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.