The Fine Arts Society of Sarasota Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237098475
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Phone
9413515361
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$179,080
Expenses
$208,398
Assets
$2,292,255
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM RUSLING (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL DARLING (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEANNETTE PALADINO (PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WILLIAM RUSLING (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL DARLING (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ELAINE FOSTER (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide educational displays and information on art in our area and to provide scholarships.

What it reported doing in 2025

Philanthropysince 1969, the fine arts society of sarasota, inc. Has awarded over $1,300,000 in scholarships to students pursuing careers in the arts and allows the complimentary use of the arts advocates gallery for events and exhibits to local arts and educational organizations whose mission is congruent with that of fine arts. In recent years, our scholarship students have prepared for professional careers in drawing, painting, sculpture, photography, film, dance, musical theatre, set design, vocal and instrumental music, creative writing, and architecture. Among the many schools our scholars have attended are carnegie mellon university, cleveland institute of art, manhattan school of music, ringling college of art and design, university of miami and the university of Florida. Many of these students return to sarasota, Florida while others live and work in all parts of the world.docent-led tours of the art collection are available to the public on a weekly basis. In cooperation with the county school districts awards are also given to winning middle school students in an annual art competition.

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 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $179K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.