Ordway Center for the Performing Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411428998
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6512823000
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Performing Arts Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,498,607
Expenses
$23,226,549
Assets
$91,178,607
Liabilities
$4,546,885

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Christopher L Harrington (President and CEO)
  • Diane L Nixa (Vice President of Advancement)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christopher L Harrington (President and CEO): $366,372 total reported compensation
  • Diane L Nixa (Vice President of Advancement): $224,144 total reported compensation
  • Christine M Sagstetter (EVP and CFO): $216,564 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ordway center for the performing arts (the ordway) mission is to be a cornerstone of exceptional artistic, educational, and cultural experiences.

What it reported doing in 2024

Facilities - provide a world-class venue for the presentation of theatrical, multi-disciplinary, international, and educational programs, including those of ordway's resident arts organizations, the saint paul chamber orchestra, the Minnesota opera, and the schubert club. These programs served approximately 214,000 individuals, via in-person attendance and through virtual viewings, during the period of july 1, 2024, to june 30, 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 21.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.93; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 33 of 34 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $19.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $366K · 42 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $970K reported
  • Consistency: 50 of 50 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.