Malashock Dance & Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330394537
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192601622
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$712,195
Expenses
$955,782
Assets
$115,111
Liabilities
$235,548

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MOLLY PURYEAR (EXECUTIVE DI): $112,454 total reported compensation
  • JOHN MALASHOCK (DIRECTOR): $101,847 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote dance as an avenue for personal expression through participation, education, and artistic collaboration. Malashock dance values artistry, impact, collaboration, community, inclusion, and stewardship in its efforts to advance the art and artistic collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2023

Malashock dance identifies community education partners who work with the organization to provide dance programs in school, after school, and at various institutions and educational settings. Education manager provides the administration and management of these programs. Education programs are designed to create access to dance for under-served students and communities, low-income families, individuals with disabilities, and anyone who is inspired to move. Md partners with local schools and institutions to provide free or low-cost dance programs that ignite a passion for movement and self-expression, while demonstrating a holistic approach to innovation and learning.

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 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.5%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -34.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.5% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $665K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.