Danceusa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521253457
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028331717
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,058,262
Expenses
$2,406,461
Assets
$1,864,723
Liabilities
$63,702

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELLEE EDUSEI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLEE EDUSEI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,980 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Dance/USA is the national service organization for the dance ecosystem.

What it reported doing in 2025

Engagement - dance forum brings together the dance industry to discuss immediate, field-wide issues every january. Dance business bootcamp equips individual artists with the skills and knowledge they need to address current business challenges. National conference is the national biennial convening of the dance ecosystem. Research - dance/USA performs annual surveys to measure the financial health, economic impact, and changing economic landscape of the dance field. See schedule o for additional program languageadvocacy - dance/USA represents the dance ecosystem before congress, federal agencies, and the white house and updates the member community on federal issues and legislation that affect the arts and culture sector. Archiving - dance/USA promotes education and awareness of dance archiving practices, dance history, and scholarship. Membership meetings dance/USA hosts regular meetings of peer groups to cultivate and strengthen relationships within the national dance ecosystem.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.9%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: -16.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.9% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.