Covenant Players

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237186252
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Oxnard, CA, USA
Phone
8054867155
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$198,709
Expenses
$201,003
Assets
$575,654
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBIN M JOHNSON-TANNER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANICE BERNHARD (HEADQUARTERS STAFF): $5,808 total reported compensation
  • ROBIN S GOETTL (FIELD UNIT LEADER): $5,703 total reported compensation
  • SUZANNE GOETTL (FIELD UNIT LEADER): $5,702 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To serve the greater christian church in its many and varied permutations and to serve the community at large through the use of the dramatic arts in support of the work of educational and social organizations and institutions.

What it reported doing in 2022

Covenant players performs plays, live music, audience involvement exercises and conducts drama and communications workshops worldwide utilizing nearly 5 field units performing in approximately 10 countries. Convenant players delivers both christian and secular programs with the intent to engage audiences and provoke and challenge the individual with a focus on deepening people's spiritual life, and a conscious sense of awareness for how they live their lives and relate to others. Thousands of people view these performances.

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 92% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $175K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.