Pomerene Center for the Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311118730
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Coshocton, OH, USA
Phone
7406220326
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,982
Expenses
$69,864
Assets
$354,054
Liabilities
$61

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY CASEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AMY CASEY (PRESIDENT)
  • SYDNEY FENDER (TREASURER)
  • CAROL HAMPTON (BOARD MEMBER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Promotion of the arts.

What it reported doing in 2024

The park hotel burned to the ground in july05. In april 09 the pomerene center signed a temporary lease to facilitate community discussion, planning and development of a multi-use public space. January 2014 the pomerene purchased the lot for development as a permanent artpark. The following july we received a state capital arts appropriation for the development of the park. The artpark design process was supported in part by a national endowment for the arts our town grant awarded to the pomerene center for the arts in partnership with coshocton city. Through our town, the nea supports creative placemaking projects that help transform communities into lively, beautiful, and sustainable places with the arts at their core. Purchase price of the land was 22,261.00.

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

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.5%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.07; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.