The Academy of American Poets Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 131879953
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2122740343
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Humanities Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,086,421
- Expenses
- $5,276,808
- Assets
- $17,331,525
- Liabilities
- $3,014,881
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICARDO MALDONADO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- RICARDO MALDONADO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $195,370 total reported compensation
- LEONARD EJIOGU (VP OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRA): $179,997 total reported compensation
- JEFFERY GLEAVES (DIRECTOR OF ENGAGEMENT & CONTENT DIRECTOR): $127,223 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To encourage, stimulate, and foster the production of american poetry by providing fellowships for poets of proven merit, by granting scholarships, awards and prizes for poetic achievement, and by other such means as the board of directors may devise and determine.
What it reported doing in 2024
Awards and prizes: the academy administered and awarded poetry prizes to poets at all stages of their careers through various programs, including the poets laureate fellowships, the poetry fund through amazon literary partnerships, the wallace stevens award, the academy of american poets fellowship, the lenore marshall prize, the james laughlin award, the first book award, the harold morton landon translation award, the american poets emergency fund, and the treehouse climate action poetry prize. Additionally, the academy provided student prizes at hundreds of colleges and universities nationwide.poetry coalition: the academy served as the coordinator and fiscal administrator of the poetry coalition, an intentionally inclusive alliance of thirty organizations, most of which are led by working, published poets who also serve as arts administrators. Each of these organizations employs paid staff who are published poets, with a primary mission to promote poets and poetry. Many are multi-genre literary organizations that serve poets and readers of all backgrounds.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - 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: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 40th 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: 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: -71%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.28; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $195K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 26 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.