Oni Dance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510653818
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Shorewood, WI, USA
Phone
8185990425
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,234
Expenses
$34,567
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$4,083

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Oni Dance is an organization of artists

What it reported doing in 2011

Achievements by the organization in 2011: in january, oni dance was selected by the joyce foundation as a participant in the a.w.a.r.d show. In march, it continued their 2010/2011 tour with three performances in nyc's joyce soho. In april, oni dance completed their 2010/2011 tour with two performances in los angeles, ca. In august, oni dance was invited to perform at csulb's martha knobel theater by lama/los angeles movement artists for the performance of momentum. In addition, in november, oni dance was commissioned by brentwood high school to choreograph a dance for the high school dance company's winter concert.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -14.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.