The Center for Emerging Visual Artists Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232250532
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2155467775
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Visual Arts Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$480,646
Expenses
$379,085
Assets
$496,212
Liabilities
$42,213

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN CASAL (PRESIDENT)
  • GENEVIEVE COUTROUBIS (ARTISTIC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JULIETTE COOK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(until Feb25))
  • JILL LEVIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(since June25))

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIETTE COOK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(until Feb25)): $85,535 total reported compensation
  • GENEVIEVE COUTROUBIS (ARTISTIC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $74,735 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cfevas purpose is to provide emerging visual artists in the philadelphia area with career counseling, support and opportunities to exhibit works.

What it reported doing in 2024

Career development program promotes the profressional development and career advancement of a select group of highly talented emerging visual artists, while encouraging their participation in the local arts community through exhibitions, professional development, mentorship and more; regional arts program provides emerging visual arts and community members with unique opportunities to share their enthusiasm, knowledge and gift of art through programs like hand-in-hand, community exhibitions, direct dialogues and the maida r. Milone resource center; philadelphia open studio tours is an annual community-based event during the first two weekends in october where hundreds of visual artists in 18 philadelphia neighborhoods open their studios to the public to show and sell artwork.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.8%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.8% of revenue deployed · 71.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $272K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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 57/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.