The Architectural League of New York

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131671027
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2127531722
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,336,099
Expenses
$2,430,698
Assets
$9,254,920
Liabilities
$1,366,181

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

45 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIO GOODEN (PRESIDENT)
  • JACOB MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACOB MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $200,516 total reported compensation
  • ANNE RIESELBACH (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $155,765 total reported compensation
  • MARIANA MOGILEVICH (EDITOR-IN-CHIEF): $124,498 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The architectural league of New York supports critically transformative work in the allied fields that shape the built environment. As a vital, independent forum, the league stimulates thinking, debate, and action on today's (continued on schedule o) converging crises of racism, inequity, and climate change, in service of a more livable and just world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Urban omnibus online publication: the league's award-winning online publication, urban omnibus, raises new questions, illuminates diverse perspectives, and documents creative projects to advance the collective work of citymaking, challenging its readers to expand their capacity to see, understand, and shape New York city. Uo is free to all readers, and its topics and perspectives are relevant to cities everywhere. Urban omnibus's editorial approach accommodates different reading habits and explores topics with a balance of breadth and depth. Multi-part, topical, cross-disciplinary series deeply engage complex topics, standalone features, in various formats, and by individuals ranging from historians to artists to geographers to (continued on schedule o)architects to activists, examine the practices, skills, institutions, and geographical arrangements that shape the physical environment and experience of the city. All features have a long life online, and are often accessed by students, teachers, researchers, and all kinds of citymakers long after their original publication.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.81; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 41 of 41 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 45 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 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: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.