Sterling Ballet Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453957267
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Sterling, VA, USA
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$207,439
Expenses
$156,965
Assets
$112,622
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TUYA TUMENNASAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TUYA TUMENNASAN (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The non-profit organization is organized for educational purposes.

What it reported doing in 2014

To provide educational services

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 57.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.