Rhinebeck Writers Retreat Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320347704
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Staatsburg, NY, USA
Phone
9172097679
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$269,294
Expenses
$199,112
Assets
$187,949
Liabilities
$6,328

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERICA ROTSTEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KATHERINE EVANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (RESIGNED AUGUST 2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • ERICA ROTSTEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $46,667 total reported compensation
  • KATHERINE EVANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (RESIGNED AUGUST 2025)): $27,667 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of rhinebeck writers retreat is to provide a sanctuary for musical theatre writers to develop their musicals in the heart of the hudson valley, and to promote awareness for the creation of this uniquely american art form.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, rhinebeck writers retreat ran two core programs. 1) summer residencies: in june, july, and august we hosted nine sequential weeklong residencies in the hudson valley for nine writing teams to develop new musicals. We cover 100% of their costs including the residency home, travel, food, pianos, writing supplies, and a $550 stipend per writer; pair each team with a peer advisor, or dramaturgical mentor; and provide a $1,000 discretionary writers choice grant to further the development of their musical. We supported 24 residency writers representing a wide range of backgrounds and artistic voices. 2) triple r: in the spring we selected one alumni team for our three-step development incubator that includes, sequentially, a cold table read in nyc, a writing residency upstate, and a professional staged reading back in nyc. Again, we cover 100% of the costs, including all artist fees associated with the readings, offering the writers the care and support to focus on their craft and advance their musical closer to production

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.7%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.1%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.7% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $148K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $47K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.