Key West Film Festival Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 455209529
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- Clarendon Hills, IL, USA
- Phone
- 6307965711
- Rating
- 55
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $208,068
- Expenses
- $213,464
- Assets
- $16,046
- Liabilities
- $17,638
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- BROOKE CHRISTIAN (DIR/FOUNDER/PRE)
- STEPHEN ANANICZ (DIR/VP)
- ETHAN CROOKS (DIR/VP/SEC)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide a film festival that will educate the public on the fine art of film making, while providing lesser-known film makers an opportunity to showcase their talents they would not otherwise have in the unique culture of key west.
What it reported doing in 2020
THE PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE of key west film festival CORPORATION (kwff) IS TO BE A GROUNDBREAKING, INNOVATIVE FILM FESTIVAL WHICH EMPHASIZES THE ATTRIBUTES AND THE UNIQUE QUALITIES OF KEY WEST, FLORIDA with a focus on tHE EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF fiLMAKING. the festival is held annually for one week during november. kwff is run exclusively by volunteers and incorporates existing historical structures of key west.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 31
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 31.5%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 30.7%; rating input score 31
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 31.5% of revenue deployed · 30.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $66K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.