Oregon Coast Council for the Arts
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 930696250
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Newport, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5415742655
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,340,603
- Expenses
- $1,124,289
- Assets
- $1,825,822
- Liabilities
- $236,396
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WAYNE COUTO (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JASON HOLLAND (EXECUTIVE DI): $120,000 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 celebrate, promote and develop community arts.
What it reported doing in 2024
Oregon coast council for the arts (occa) operates and manages the newport performing arts center (pac) and newport visual arts center (vac) on behalf of the city of newport, providing year-round access to arts education, exhibitions, performances, community events, and cultural programming serving lincoln county and the Oregon coast. During the fiscal year, occa presented and supported hundreds of performances, classes, workshops, exhibitions, festivals, and community arts experiences serving more than 40,000 residents and visitors combined through the pac and vac. Programs included youth summer camps, after-school arts education, community workshops, free gallery exhibitions, artist talks, major cultural festivals like the Oregon coast jazz party, and performances by local, regional, and touring artists. The vac presented dozens of exhibitions featuring hundreds of local artists and provided ongoing arts education opportunities for youth and adults, while the pac serviced as the region's primary performing arts venue and home to numerous resident arts organizations and community partners. Through these efforts, occa continues to expand access to arts and culture in a rural coastal community.
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 82% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $139 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $844K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.