Phoenix Film Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861012666
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6029556444
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$450,731
Expenses
$393,206
Assets
$22,526
Liabilities
$23,247

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLISON FROST (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON CARNEY (NON-VOTING EXEC. DIRECTOR): $60,740 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide awareness and education of independent filmmaking

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, the Phoenix Film Foundation achieved significant milestones in promoting independent cinema and film education in Arizona. Here are some of their key accomplishments: The Phoenix Film Festival, the Foundations flagship event, celebrated its 24th edition from April 4 to April 14, 2024, at Harkins Theatres: Scottsdale 101. The festival expanded to an 11-day event, featuring approximately 290 screenings, parties, and workshops.The Phoenix Film Foundation continued its commitment to film education through various programs. Arizona Student Film Festival; providing a platform for young filmmakers to showcase their work and IFP Phoenix, offering workshops, filmmaker challenges, and forums to support independent filmmakers in Arizona .Through these initiatives and events, the Phoenix Film Foundation significantly contributed to the growth of independent film and film education in Arizona in 2024.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.7%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.03; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.7% of revenue deployed · 63.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $250K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.