Alameda Theater

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273130778
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-N 2010
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2107104796
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,218
Expenses
$21,197
Assets
$7,873,454
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ERNEST BROMLEY (CHAIR)
  • ROLANDO PABLOS (SECRETARY)
  • BRUCE BARSHOP (DIRECTOR)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the alameda theater is to be a multi-media live performing arts and film center featuring the american latino story.

What it reported doing in 2015

Renovation/construction of the theater in downtown san antonio, Texas. All expenses incurred in relation to the renovation/construction are capitalized as construction in progress.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 0.1%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 371.44; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -32.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.