The Arts Studio Dba Firehouse Art Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742380475
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Longmont, CO, USA
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$211,916
Expenses
$211,916
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • E Waterman (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • E Waterman (Executive Director): $62,693 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 Firehouse Art Center inspires cultural engagement and human connection by providing life-enhancing experiences through exhibitions, education, and community events. The Firehouse is a non-profit art center committed to exhibiting thought-provoking art created by local, regional, and national artists. Through our no-fee admission gallery and our outreach art classes taught at no cost to under-resourced areas of the community, we strive to bring the healing nature of art to all. The Firehouse Art Center is Longmont's leading contemporary art center, featuring national and local artists with over a dozen exhibitions a year. A cornerstone of the Longmont Creative District, we offer educational programs, events, and membership programs to support creativity for all. Our goal is to raise cultural awareness and understanding of the arts in the regional community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Firehouse's education programs span all age groups and interests. Summer includes classes for children during their school break, both at our facility and the BoCo Farmer's Market. Our adult education consists of all different media and ability levels. Most classes are offered at a low cost or on a sliding scale, to further reach the overall community

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.5%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.5% of revenue deployed · 52.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $212K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 40 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Assets line sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Liabilities line sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.