Manestage Theatre
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 261716529
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2022
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022
- Location
- Puyallup, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2534477645
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Performing Arts Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $479,462
- Expenses
- $453,810
- Assets
- $512,419
- Liabilities
- $244,353
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brenda S Henson (President - Board of Directors Executive Director)
- Jason A Henson (Member - Board of Directors Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Brenda S Henson (President - Board of Directors Executive Director): $112,914 total reported compensation
- Judy Brooks (Head Costumer): $16,083 total reported compensation
- Scott E Pickard (Advisory Board Member Chief Financial Officer): $15,278 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
ManeStage Theatre's mission is to bring together a family of creative artists of all ages committed to producing dynamic drama that enhances the moral imagination to stimulate and educate audiences from all walks of life and to serve the community by producing professional family oriented entertainment.
What it reported doing in 2022
ManeStage Theatre produced four shows in 2022 including 45 individual performances generating a total of 11,412 tickets sold. A detailed breakdown is as follows: 1 Anne of Green Gables; 10 performances; 2,853 tickets sold. 2 The Sound of Music; 12 performances; 3,245 tickets sold. 3 Peter and the Star Catchers; 10 performances; 1,461 tickets sold. 4 Elf the Musical; 13 performances; 3,853 tickets sold.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 80% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
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: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 9
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.4%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $77.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.4%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 37.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 41.8% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82.4% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $60K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.