Sam and Alfreda Maloof Foundation For Arts and Crafts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330631685
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alta Loma, CA, USA
Phone
9099800412
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Art Museums

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$886,791
Expenses
$889,175
Assets
$9,026,968
Liabilities
$157,431

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • James Rawitsch (Executive Dir.): $74,940 total reported compensation
  • Drew Oberjuerge (Executive Dir.): $60,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Operate and maintain a cultural center/museum for the display of arts and craft objects, woodworkings, sculptures, decorations, furniture and tools from the American "Arts and Craft Movement", as well as a home built by Samuel S. Maloof, a master woodworker and furniture maker.

What it reported doing in 2025

Other Program Services - The Maloof Foundation originates gallery exhibitions drawn from its permanent collection holdings, which include the world's largest collection of Sam Maloof furniture. Touring exhibitions originating elsewhere explore themes of art, craft and environmental sustainability. The 2400-square foot art gallery is open for viewing, offered free to all. The Maloof also lends art from its collection for display in exhibitions at other museums. The Maloof Store, part of the Foundation's mission to cultivate and nurture artists, offers for sale works of art by local artists, as well as art prints, woodworking, books, prints, souvenirs and related merchandise.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.15; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $754K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.