Sunset Cultural Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522404864
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carmelbythesea, CA, USA
Phone
8316202040
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Theater

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,215,357
Expenses
$3,136,670
Assets
$1,759,980
Liabilities
$449,713

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH BOWMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH BOWMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,842 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance the performing arts on the central coast by preserving and stewarding a historic venue for world-class performances and by expanding equitable access to diverse programming, arts education, and community engagement that enhance the cultural vitality of the region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sunset theater: scc maintains and enhances its historic theater to present high-quality performing arts and serve as the home to resident companies, including carmel bach festival, monterey symphony, carmel music society, and chamber music monterey bay. Through its sunset presents series and partnerships, scc hosts over 155 performances and events annually in its 713-seat venue, serving more than 200,000 patrons and 1,400 students. Ticket revenue supports approximately 30% of operations; the remainder is funded through city support, facility rentals, and fundraising, ensuring continued access to diverse cultural programming for the central coast community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.9%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.9% of revenue deployed · 63% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.