Bethel Woods Center for the Arts

Legal name: Bethel Woods Center for the Arts Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454083198
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Bethel, NY, US
Phone
8452952400
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$34,802,219
Expenses
$31,811,160
Assets
$37,207,679
Liabilities
$12,314,713

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eric Frances (CEO/CFO/Trustee)

Highest reported compensation

  • Eric Frances (CEO/CFO/Trustee): $478,473 total reported compensation
  • Paul Lloyd (Overhead General Manager): $236,690 total reported compensation
  • Paul Christman (Treasurer): $182,869 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide extraordinary experiences and access to the arts, carrying forward the legacy of the 1969 Woodstock festival.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Center is located at the site of the 1969 Woodstock Festival in Bethel, NY. The Center is committed to inspiring expression, creativity and innovation through the arts. The Center offers multiple stages featuring a diverse selection of popular and culturally-rich performances, an award-winning museum, and educational and community programs that provide meaningful experience in the arts, history and civic engagement. The heart of the Center is the pavilion stage amphitheater that accommodates 15,000 patrons while offering unique backdrops including the original festival site and the majesty of the surrounding Sullivan County countryside.Programmatic revenue reported in Part III includes all ticket sales and membership due revenue (inclusive of amounts reported as membership contributions in Part VIII, Line 1(b)).

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 66% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th 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: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 79.9% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $478K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $7M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.