Springfield Ballet Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431089752
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Springfield, MO, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$676,690
Expenses
$639,757
Assets
$1,026,862
Liabilities
$73,325

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRISTIN MCCOY (PRESIDENT)
  • CHUCK FUGATE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ASHLEY PAIGE ROMINES (ARTISTIC DIR): $60,850 total reported compensation
  • ABIGAIL LIND (EXECUTIVE DIR): $54,607 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dedicated to advancing the art of ballet through premier education, performance, outreach and collaberation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conservatory, public performances and community outreach, educate and develop dancers in the art and history of ballet, as well as providing professionally trained dancers for performances provided to the general public. Numerous performances were presented during the year, including an annual performance of the nutcracker, which is provided to every second grader in the springfield, Missouri r-12 school district. Our outreach programs are provided to the city of springfield, as well as the surrounding communities, which include but are not limited to traveling performances, scholarships, and afterschool activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 79% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.61; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.6% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $519K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.