Arts Collaborative of Nevada County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270314493
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Nevada City, CA, USA
Phone
5302785155
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Council/Agency

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,736,422
Expenses
$1,706,915
Assets
$1,412,182
Liabilities
$1,135,699

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZA TUDOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JON BLINDER (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZA TUDOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $90,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nevada county arts council is state-local partner with California arts council, and part of a coalition of county arts agencies serving diverse populations in every county. We facilitate collaborative efforts that promote and sustain arts, culture, and creativity while supporting as sense of belonging for all peoples. We collaborate across county lines with peer agencies and partners, and support regional identities and alliances, particulary as this work relates to our role as one of the 58 county arts agencies under the state-local partner program.

What it reported doing in 2024

Upstate California creative corpsperformed the role of administering organization for the California arts council in the upstate region. Distributed grant awards across nineteen counties, with county arts agenices led by Nevada city arts council.32 partner agencies and 48 lead creative partners, with a total of 184 paid artists, culture bearers and cultural workers now supporting initiatives serving our least represented peoples, and most vulnerable communities and environments over 47,000 square miles. 88% of our grantees received state funds for the first time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 43.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 35.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.