Civic Center Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731606322
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Oklahoma City, OK, USA
- Phone
- 4055948264
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,997,296
- Expenses
- $8,890,138
- Assets
- $17,979,283
- Liabilities
- $2,992,815
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GREGG HENSON (PRESIDENT)
- COLLINS PECK (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ELIZABETH GRAY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
- JAMIE SIMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ELIZABETH GRAY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $287,827 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW MALY (DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES): $118,933 total reported compensation
- DUSHARME CARTER-LLANUSA (DIRECTOR OF MARKETING): $113,338 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 ensure a strong and vibrant performing arts presence in the city through continued capital improvements of the civic center and community-wide educational outreach.
What it reported doing in 2024
Theatre productions - during the fiscal year ending june 30, 2025, the civic center music hall hosted 225 performances, 197 other events, and 243,493 patrons and guests were in attendance. The foundation contributed an additional $92,014 towards the 2017 go bond project renovation, totaling $2,861,090 contributed. Additionally, the foundation spent an additional $1,107,919 on capital improvements including the replacement of the meinders hall of mirrors flooring and a down payment on state of the art digital led signage for outside the building.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 82% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 55
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.9%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 57.5%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 64.9% of revenue deployed · 57.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $288K · 28 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $372K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.