Bead Town Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474108993
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- New Orleans, LA, USA
- Phone
- 3127853365
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,000
- Expenses
- $63,487
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $35,743
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
Highest reported compensation
- STEPHAN WANGER (DIRECTOR): $32,960 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To Display works of art from recycled Mardi Gras beads and other recycled objects and materials by applying innovative teaching methods.
What it reported doing in 2016
To Display works of art from recyled Mardi Gras beads and other recycled objects and materials by applying innovative teaching methods.
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 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 6
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5.8%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 51.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.