Raton Arts and Humanities Council Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 850364228
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Raton, NM, USA
- Phone
- 5754452052
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts Council/Agency
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $78,411
- Expenses
- $89,088
- Assets
- $23,462
- Liabilities
- $145
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ARTHUR FULKERSON (PRESIDENT)
- PATRICIA DURAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- ARTHUR FULKERSON (PRESIDENT)
- PATRICIA DURAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- CHRISSY BIRD (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 provide access to the arts in northeastern New Mexico.
What it reported doing in 2025
To provide access to the arts in northeastern newmexico. Provide opportunity to approximately 10,000people to be exposed to the theater and arts that would not normally have an opportunity because oflocation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 79% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 51.9%; rating input score 52
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: -13.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59% of revenue deployed · 51.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $46K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.