Screamfest Horror Film Festival

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113653798
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Phone
3103583273
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$227,972
Expenses
$258,461
Assets
$-54,588
Liabilities
$-73,523

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rachel Belofsky (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Karen Sanders (Co-Director): $41,600 total reported compensation
  • Fernando Ramos (Festival Assistant): $25,456 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Screamfest Horror Film Festival seeks to discover the emerging talents of up and coming filmmakers and writers within the horror Sci-Fi genres by providing a venue to have their work showcased to the public and industry influentials. The organization provides free to low cost screenings for the general public and educational workshops.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Organization presents the Screamfest Horror Film Festival & Screenplay Competition as part of its annual festival. The festival also includes seminars at which attendees are educated by directors, writers, working professionals and industry executives. The festival is well attended and features the work of more than 300 emerging horror/Sci-Fi filmmakers and writers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 87% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 total spending goes to programs and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.1%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -0.21; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.1% of revenue deployed · 53% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $137K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.