Siff

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911489660
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2064645830
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,495,517
Expenses
$9,993,094
Assets
$12,419,607
Liabilities
$13,066,941

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIANA KNAUF (PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHANIE DEVAAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS MARA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS MARA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $189,774 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA STUART-LEHALLE (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $168,913 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH BARRETT (ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $152,283 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Siff is a seattle-based 501(c)(3) arts nonprofit dedicated to the creation of vibrant experiences and spaces that champion film discovery and arts education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Siff hosts the annual seattle international film festival traditionally attracting nearly 150,000 attendees to celebrate films from more than 80 countries and regions around the world. Many of the features, short films, and documentaries we screen will not have a return to us cinemas, making it an amazing event to discover new and underrepresented voices and stories.the seattle international film festival draws more than 140,000 attendees annually. Siff's education programming includes filmmaker training and film appreciation for both youth and adults. Our education programs reach approximately 10,000 annually.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $190K · 32 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $121K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.