Orchestra Place Renewal Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383277549
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3135765100
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$700,372
Expenses
$844,603
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARTHUR O'REILLY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNE PARSONS (SECRETARY): $390,551 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide support and assistance to organizations primarily serving the detroit area in the fields of arts and culture, especially where such organizations maintain facilities in areas characterized by poverty, unemployment and distress; to provide relief from pervasive poverty, unemployment and general distress in areas of the city of detroit that are included within the empowerment zone designated pursuant to 26 usc section 1391; and to alleviate conditions of poverty and community deterioration and to provide assistance to governmental units seeking to pursue those same goals within that same area.

What it reported doing in 2020

To support detroit symphony orchestra, inc. Through development of orchestra place into a multi-cultural arts and education center to further revitalize the surrounding area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -22.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $819K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $391K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $103K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.