Saint Louis Art Museum
Legal name: St Louis Art Museum Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 431374479
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- St. Louis, MO, US
- Phone
- 3147210072
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $25,077,695
- Expenses
- $12,593,342
- Assets
- $357,934,351
- Liabilities
- $1,166,657
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MIN JUNG KIM (PRESIDENT & DIR. OF MUSEUM)
- JOHN M HORSEMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MIN JUNG KIM (PRESIDENT & DIR. OF MUSEUM): $976,950 total reported compensation
- CAROLYN J SCHMIDT (DEPUTY DIRECTOR & CONTROLLER): $794,309 total reported compensation
- MARK MACINSKI (CHIEF OF OPERATIONS AND SECURITY): $386,011 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Following the guidelines set forth by the American Association of Museums (AAM) in April 2001, the European Provenance Disclosure Project identifies and provides up-to-date information on all European paintings in the Museum’s collection that may have been purchased, sold, or created during the Nazi era. From the time they came into power in 1933 through the end of World War II in 1945, the Nazis conducted a massive confiscation of art and cultural property throughout Europe. In the post-war years, many works were returned to their rightful owners or heirs, but others had already entered new collections by way of the international art market. In recent years, along with museums around the wo.
What it reported doing in 2025
The st louis art museum foundation supported the museum in the amount of $12,033,574 for programs and other museum activities in 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 88
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 97.9%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 49.8%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 28.42; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 97.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $12.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $977K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.