Princeton Art Guild Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310958777
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Princeton, KY, USA
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,700
Expenses
$19,585
Assets
$196,733

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • Emily Burke (Gallery Attendant)

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 provide arts education cultural programming and community-based creative opportunities that enhance quality of life and promote public engagement with the arts.

What it reported doing in 2025

Artist Support and Community Development: The Princeton Art Guild supports local and regional artists by providing exhibition opportunities studio space and professional development initiatives. This includes the development of an Artist-in-Residence program and informal access to workspace and creative resources.In addition the Guild is expanding its role as a community development resource by providing access to creative tools technology and design-focused learning opportunities that support workforce development and civic engagement.These efforts supported approximately 10-25 artists directly and contributed to broader community engagement through public-facing programming.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 18
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.3%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 21

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 55.2%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.05; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.3% of revenue deployed · 20.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 16/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.