Emeryville Center for the Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271386445
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Emeryville, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Performing Arts Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,843
Expenses
$87,455
Assets
$116,314
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The emeryville center for the arts' mission is to inspire artistic expression and advance cultural literacy. The art center honors emeryville's rich, diverse, and creative heritage through active community engagement in the visual and performing arts.

What it reported doing in 2012

The art center is in the process of renovating an existing building which will house galleries, a theater for performances, and other educational programs. The art center also put on a series of artist salons. The art center continues to engage in negotiations with various emerging and virtuoso visual and performing artists, who will participate in programming.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -77.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.