Marin Civic Ballet Association Dba Marin Ballet

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941673792
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Phone
4154536705
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,178,939
Expenses
$1,132,719
Assets
$1,480,261
Liabilities
$128,617

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MONA STEINBERG (PRESIDENT)
  • ANN ELIAS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE HADER (DIRECTOR OF MARIN BALLET): $105,350 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of marin ballet is to provide excellent dance training and education and to promote the art of dance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Classical dance training: marin ballet's mission is to provide excellent classical dance training and education, and to promote the art of dance. Marin ballet is a school that is known nationallly as an organization that can as successfully prepare young persons to succeed in the dance profession as it can instill a lifelong appreciation for the arts in all of its students, whether they go on to pursue a professional dance career or not.the marin ballet training program currently serves nearly 200 youth per year and more than 50 adults in a diverse scheudle of more than 75 classes per week spanning the range of pre-ballet for 3 year olds, advanced ballet for the aspiring professional, and fun, challenging classes for the adult ameteur. Our comprehesive program for ballet training includes exposure to modern dance, jazz, yoga, pilates, west african, swing, flamenco, musical theatre, and character specialty classes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% 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 - 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: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.5%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.9%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.5% of revenue deployed · 58.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $664K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.