Nac Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 476039543
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Omaha, NE, USA
- Phone
- 4025952195
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,269,753
- Expenses
- $730,678
- Assets
- $2,123,220
- Liabilities
- $24,955
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SARAH PEETZ (PRESIDENT)
- MARK LAUGHLIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MIKE MARKEY (EX OFFICIO): $99,653 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To stimulate and encourage the study and presentation of fine and performing arts throughout the state.
What it reported doing in 2024
Cultural preservation endowment - cpef funds are used in one of the following three categories stabilization of Nebraska's arts organizations - stabilization can take many forms, from utilizing a grant program designed to stimulate endowment building, or as a supplement to annual general operational support grants arts education programs that provide statewide impact - projects must demonstrate a sustained effort that has broad application most recently, the Nebraska arts council undertook a comprehensive study that will involve a task force and an outside consultant to redesign prairie visions, a summer institute for Nebraska teachers that provides tools to implement comprehensive arts education into the entire curriculum spectrum arts advocacy promotes the arts in Nebraska - the arts are important to the state's economy, quality of life, and education of its citizens the scope of the arts advocacy project can include the research, development, and production of informational materials and supplies informational pieces that provide data regarding the positive impact of arts education can be distributed at events and community meetings throughout the state
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.1%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 83.1%; rating input score 83; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 42.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.91; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 53.1% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $656K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 38 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 39 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.