Performance Commission of the Carolinas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474350224
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Huntersville, NC, USA
Phone
7702895898
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,769
Expenses
$55,054
Assets
$42,084
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cody Clark (President)
  • Renee Gill (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Cody Clark (President)
  • Renee Gill (Vice President)
  • Stephanie Cornelius (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Improve the self-esteem and self-image of young people through financial support of performing arts & sports plus offer personal development and mentoring opportunities. Allow parents/guardians to raise funds to support our young people of performing arts & sports

What it reported doing in 2025

Performance Commission of the Carolinas provided financial and program support to 25 dancers and 1 gymnast during the tax year. Assistance included payment support for competition fees, costumes, tuition, and related participation expenses to help youth remain active in dance and gymnastics programs. The organization also provided competition-day supplies and support materials for participants during events and performances. Through the Flourishing Peacock Scholarship Program, four dancers received scholarship awards to assist with dance education and competition-related expenses. In addition, the organization provided hardship assistance to a dancer experiencing financial need to ensure continued participation in dance activities and training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 94.3%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 94.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $52K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.