Piedmont Center for the Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275301684
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Piedmont, CA, USA
Phone
5104350402
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,911
Expenses
$66,043
Assets
$363,714

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sue Malick (President)

People named in this filing

  • Sue Malick (President)
  • Mark Schaeffer (Board Member)
  • Aparna Rao (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

To support the performing, visual, and literary arts in the community at large by: (I) providing a venue for the performance and display of such art forms and (II) Providing educational opportunities related to such art forms for children and adults.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education Events: These events are organized by private individuals or groups, such as music teachers for recitals, musicians for rehearsing or recording music, and individual artists looking to exhibit their work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 59.4%; rating input score 59

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.51; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.8% of revenue deployed · 59.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $39K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.