Aspen Santa Fe Ballet

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841150857
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Aspen, CO, USA
Phone
9709257175
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,692,909
Expenses
$3,160,640
Assets
$2,877,298
Liabilities
$207,726

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEAN-PHILIPPE MALATY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KELLEY PURNELL (PRESIDENT)
  • LEIGH MOIOLA (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TOM MOSSBRUCKER (ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $222,225 total reported compensation
  • JEAN-PHILIPPE MALATY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $217,725 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cultivate and enhances an understanding and appreciation of dance. Bring dance companies to our 2 home cities. Dance school for pre collegiate students.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operated ballet and folklorico schools in the aspen valley and santa fe area to enable worthy students to learn ballet and folklorico. There were approximately 531 participants in the aspen and santa fe schools. Over 11,700 people attended 18 live dance performances in aspen, co and santa fe, nm.

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 99% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 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: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.