Poncho -Patrons of Northwest Civic Cultural & Charitable Organizations
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 910751390
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- 3608601818
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $72,562
- Expenses
- $423,663
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
67 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Stephen Kutz (President)
- Evelyn Zabo (Immediate Past President)
- Lorna Kneeland (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Stephen Kutz (President)
- George Akers (Secretary & Legal Counsel)
- Marco Abbruzzese (Executive VP, Arts Ed Initiative)
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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enrich the quality of life in the puget sound region through increasing resources & community support for the arts.
What it reported doing in 2013
The poncho arts education and outreach initiative is focused on significantly increasing the amount of money in our community earmarked for support of arts education and outreach. Key features of the initiative include: funding existing programs conducted by Washington state nonprofit arts organizations, leveraging special relationships poncho has with individual donors, identifying like-minded foundations and corporations and providing them with matching opportunities for their contributions, implementing a rigorous grant review process that involves community arts education professionals and formalized evaluation tools, and continuous evaluation including site visits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Sustainability: 2
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.4%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 7
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -483.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -53% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -44.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 43.4% of revenue deployed · 7.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 67 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.