Middleton Players Theater Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391722832
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Middleton, WI, USA
Phone
6086289204
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,458
Expenses
$58,518
Assets
$8,696

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Megan Pohl (President)
  • Maddy Sylvester (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Megan Pohl (President)
  • Maddy Sylvester (Vice President)
  • Kayla Stutzman (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are a non-profit community theatre organization, committed to involving community members in high quality and affordable productions in the Middleton and greater Dane County region. We offer opportunities for learning and growth to amateur performers, technical staff, and designers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Book of Days was an artistic achievement that involved approximately 30 actors, technicians, designers, and organizations. Although it was the smallest production in terms of community exposure, it brought the greatest number of new faces to our organization out of all our productions from the past summer. We also attempted to make this production more accessible to the community, by incorporating a sign language interpreted performance in our run.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $55K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.