New Hampshire Theatre Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 020419975
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Portsmouth, NH, USA
- Phone
- 6034316644
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Theater
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $280,417
- Expenses
- $178,562
- Assets
- $99,433
- Liabilities
- $8,943
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher Lewis (Interim Board President)
People named in this filing
- Christopher Lewis (Interim Board President)
- Michael Hastings (Board Treasurer)
- Maxene Feintuch (Board Clerk)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
New Hampshire Theatre Project NHTP uses the art of theatre-making to spark conversation connect individuals and strengthen communities. NHTP provides a nurturing professional environment for youth artists and community members to be inspired and transformed through the art of theatre. We envision a community of individuals who are self-reflective articulate passionate and compassionate a community where differences are honored history and literature are explored as resources for problem-solving and difficult issues are negotiated with mutual respect and thoughtful community dialogue.
What it reported doing in 2024
NHTP offers workshops private coaching and classes for all ages at our home venue and other community facilities. The Theatre For Life program offers professional development through the theatre arts to individuals businesses and community organizations. NHTP also rents our facility to other community organizations who offer educational programs for all ages.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - 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: 44
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.8%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.8% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $114K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 41 of 43 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.