Seeds Dance Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844121254
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Valley, NE, USA
Phone
4026707206
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,634
Expenses
$56,660
Assets
$67,238
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIN JENSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN BRUMMUND (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ERIN JENSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN BRUMMUND (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY BRUMMUND (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Seeds dance project is an educational nonprofit established for the purchase of providing and using dance to impact our world. Our vision is to plant seeds of hope through dance that inspire confidence, courage, and creativity to people with limited access to the arts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Evergreen dance company exists as a community of trained dancers committed to their art in both performance and instruction, desiring to bring hope and love to the audience and the student. We desire to share the freedom and joy we have in knowing god, as we use our movement to worship and tell his stories that bring light across cultures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 60% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.6%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.6% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $44K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.