Park City Summit County Arts Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742457798
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Park City, UT, USA
Phone
4352005220
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,038,153
Expenses
$940,356
Assets
$329,567
Liabilities
$115,679

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Jocelyn Scudder (Executive Dir.): $115,992 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Art Council of Park City & Summit County is to serve our arts & culture community by driving creative programming, providing valuable resources, and cultivating connections. We envision a community where arts & culture is critical, where creatives thrive, and where all people connect through the arts. We execute this work through four core areas of work: programming, marketing, public art, and planning/advocacy activities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Planning and Advocacy: As an Arts Council, we consistently assess the health and vitality of the local Arts & Culture sector to help direct our advocacy efforts and plan for the future. Part of that work includes data collection and analysis to help us understand quantifiable metrics such as Industry data, cultural nonprofit impact, cultural event impact, and investments in the sector to help us understand trends, forecasting, and overall health. The Arts Council worked with both national and statewide agencies to offer two different types of economic impact studies over the last few years including the Kem C. Gardner Utah Cultural Industries Study and Arts & Economic Prosperity 6 Study. We are also about to launch an Arts & Culture Master Plan for Summit County. The Arts & Culture Master Plan will guide Summit County in amplifying that power to ensure the actions of the Arts & Culture sector align with City and County priorities and provide maximum social, cultural, and economic benefits that enhance local quality of life.

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 100% 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.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.1% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $821K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.