Ballet of the Dolls Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 363588510
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Phone
- 9525937422
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Culture, and Humanities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $114,440
- Expenses
- $90,382
- Assets
- $214,720
- Liabilities
- $201,054
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- DAVID WARNER (VICE CHAIR)
- MICHAEL RAINVILLE (BOARD CHAIR)
- GREG HANDBERG (TREASURER)
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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To fearlessley create challenging and surprising dance work that brings a sense of discovery to audiences and artists alike
What it reported doing in 2014
Providing the twin cities with a year-round dance theater program that fills a unique niche in the arts community, offering intimate and innovation professional dance theater performances that appeal to both dance and theater audiences
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95
- 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 21%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.38; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.94; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.