Malibu Stage Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954333906
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Malibu, CA, USA
Phone
3105891998
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Theater
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$101,580
Expenses
$129,194
Assets
$88,645
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIA HOLLAND (Secretary/Treas): $3,300 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary exempt purpose of the malibu stage company, a 501 (c) (3) organization, is to provide the local malibu community with a viable theatre for the performing arts and to foster an environment whereby the community benefits from the literary and cultural value of such a theatre.to date the organization has held fund raisers, plays, readings and open-houses at the theatre and various locations in malibu. During 1996 the organization located and leased a permanent theatre site.the venue, which was formerly a church, has been converted into a theatre. The bulk of monies received in prior years has been used toward the conversion process which began in late 1996 and was completed in late 1999.performances and workshops are currently held at the theatre site.see attached artistic director's mission statement which outlines activities which the organization has begun and or hopes to get underway in the future.

What it reported doing in 2016

Productions and readings were held at the theatre during the fiscal year ended december 31, 2016.total revenues generated were $92,536.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 76.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $99K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • 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.