Tada Theatre and Dance Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133311294
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122521619
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,404,712
Expenses
$2,402,457
Assets
$323,562
Liabilities
$482,318

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James Chalmers Browne (President)
  • Julie Turaj (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Janine Nina Trevens (Executive & Producing Artistic Director): $181,639 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

TADA! Theatre and Dance Alliance, Inc. (the Organization) was incorporated in 1985 under the laws of the State of New York. The mission of the Organization is to inspire young people from diverse social, racial, and economic backgrounds.

What it reported doing in 2024

Resident Youth Ensemble of TADA! A free pre-professional training and positive youth development program serving approximately 5070 youth and teens ages 818 from the New York City and New Jersey area. Participation in this year-round program is by audition only and provides a variety of opportunities and experiences, including free theatrical training in dance, voice, acting, and performance skills; social events; leadership and job opportunities through community service and Job RAP (Job Readiness and Apprenticeship Program); family gatherings; middle school, high school, and college preparation; transportation subsidies; international youth exchanges; healthy snacks; and field trips to attend theater performances in New York City.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.3%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.49; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.3% of revenue deployed · 62.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.