The Classical Association of the Middle West and South Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
314443706
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Natchitoches, LA, USA
Phone
3183574358
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$296,905
Expenses
$277,523
Assets
$1,648,766
Liabilities
$1,929

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lorenzo Garcia Jr (Immediate Past President)
  • Victoria Pagan (President)
  • Daniel Levine (President Elect)

Highest reported compensation

  • T Davina McClain (Secretary/Treasurer): $20,000 total reported compensation
  • Georgia Irby (Editor, CJ): $15,000 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 Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc. (CAMWS) is a professional organization for anyone interested in the classical world, including classicists at all levels of instruction, that promotes the knowledge and appreciation of classical antiquity through support of pedagogy, original research and public outreach. While the geographic range of CAMWS includes 32 U.S. states and 3 Canadian provinces, the organization welcomes members from anywhere in the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual awards to members for study abroad, teacher training, travel to CAMWS convention; annual awards to members for excellence in teaching, outstanding first book, best graduate-student paper given at the CAMWS convention; annual scholarships for undergraduate Classics majors; annual Committee for the Preservation of Latin award for best promotional activity; annual prizes for high school Latin students.

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 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.3%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.94; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.3% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $190K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.