Bay Pointe Ballet

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800923968
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
South San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
6508351035
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$498,426
Expenses
$519,870
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Tomoko Ozawa (Chairman)
  • Satoko Fogarty (Director)
  • Matthew A De Bellis (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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To produce artistic performances for public exhibition, primarily but not limited to works of dance, performed in the classical form of ballet. To provide educational services by operating a school of dance, specializing in but not limited to the teaching of classical ballet technique, with classes open to members of the public and available for all ages and skill levels, serving recreational, professional, and aspiring-professional students.

What it reported doing in 2017

To produce artistic performances for public exhibition, primarily but not limited to works of dance, performed in the classical form of Ballet; and to provide educational services by operating a school of dance, specializing in but not limited to the teaching of classical ballet technique, with classes open to members of the public and available for all ages and skill levels, serving recreational, professional, and aspiring-professional students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $62.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 19th 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: -4.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -30.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $434K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • 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.

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: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.