Bd Performing Arts
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942216542
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
- Location
- Concord, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9256892918
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,108,601
- Expenses
- $12,280,606
- Assets
- $5,605,597
- Liabilities
- $4,462,141
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AARON SUZUKI (PRESIDENT)
- RICK YEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JIMMY VERRETT (CEO)
- SEAN KING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JIMMY VERRETT (CEO): $234,600 total reported compensation
- MICHAEL STONE (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $166,925 total reported compensation
- DAVID GIBBS (SENIOR ADVISOR): $154,375 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bd performing arts permanently enriches the lives of young people through a commitment to youth development and performance excellence, while providing enjoyment for our local community and audiences worldwide.music and the performing arts connect youth with their culture through a common language crossing generational, social, and racial barriers. The activities that a young person pursues influences the type of person he or she becomes. The experience that comes with participation in a performing arts organization builds discipline, character, pride, and self-confidence at a crucial age and forms the springboard to even greater achievements in adulthood.
What it reported doing in 2024
The blue devils a corpsthe most decorated corps in the history of drum corps international, the blue devils have finished in the top five for over 40 years and have won the drum corps international world championship title more than any other performing group. The music performance group consists of approximately 150 students ages 17-21. They produce an original show at the beginning of the year, which they rehearse for about five months. They then perform their show primarily in competitive venues across the united states during the summer months. The students perform as musicians or color guard participants.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 65% 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 - 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: 38
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 14
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 45.3%; rating input score 45
- Program expense ratio: 40.3%; rating input score 40
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 45.3% of revenue deployed · 40.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $538K reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.