Advance Redding

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453342288
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redding, CA, USA
Phone
5307829484
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$471,987
Expenses
$1,767,454
Assets
$1,919,494
Liabilities
$1,614,495

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kris Vallotton (President/Chair)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nathan Parmelee (Marketing Director): $152,022 total reported compensation
  • Julie Dyar (General Manager): $134,074 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance economic growth, entertainment opportunities and cultural activities in the greater redding area through the maintenance, management and operation of the Redding convention center.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the fiscal year ended July 31, 2025, Advance Redding produced and managed 71 live events at the Redding Civic Auditorium, serving as the region's premier entertainment and community venue. Programming included national touring concerts (Alabama, Sam Hunt, Slightly Stoopid & Dirty Heads, Bonnie Raitt, Dwight Yoakam & The Mavericks, Aaron Lewis, Alison Krauss, Death Cab for Cutie, and others), comedy shows, theatrical productions, family events, trade shows, graduations, banquets, community gatherings, and local rentals. These events attracted thousands of attendees from across the North State region, contributing significantly to the cultural vitality and local economy of the greater Redding area.

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 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -274.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 52.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $925K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.