Urban Arts Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133554734
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2129665881
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,478,434
Expenses
$6,663,562
Assets
$14,471,034
Liabilities
$5,966,927

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILIP COURTNEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIP COURTNEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $318,537 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN ELIE (CHIEF OPERATING AND FINANCIAL OFFICER): $174,251 total reported compensation
  • AMY PATERSON (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $168,877 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Urban arts uses game development as a powerful educational tool to teach computer science, creativity, collaboration, and leadership, while also supporting students and educators nationwide with equitable steam curricula, professional development, and resources endorsed by the college board and the u.s. Department of education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Urban arts serves 3,000 students annually with four programs designed to help students build creative and technical skills as a pathway to college and career. 1) creative coders is a middle school computer science curriculum that focuses on game creation and world building. 2) game on is a high school ap computer science curriculum endorsed by the college board. 3) game academy is a full-service high school game development and college access program with $46m in college scholarships to date. 4) alumni services is a college persistence program that includes accelerators, mentorships and internships. Formally known as school of interactive arts.

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 98% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.7%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 10.9%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.7% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $319K · 28 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.