The Friends of the Levitt Pavilion - Greater Los Angeles and Pasadena

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810591705
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
South Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6266833230
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$700,614
Expenses
$782,563
Assets
$266,197
Liabilities
$60,165

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARRELL BROOKE (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM NEFF (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RENEE BODIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RENEE BODIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $113,238 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community through music - we produce a yearly summer season of free concerts for the community, keeping live music accessible to all and creating stronger and more connected communities, ce3lebrating the diversity of cultures, and promoting appreciation of the arts.

What it reported doing in 2016

67 concerts: production of 67 no-charge concerts at two venues to build community through music. Other programs include: intern program: the friends of the levitt pavilion - greater los angeles and pasadena (lpglp) has an active intern program for high school and college students where we bring in 50 students per venue all summer long to teach them music production. The program is designed to support students to learn and grow as individuals and professionals, to explore professional opportunitites and potential career paths and to support the levitt in accomplishing its mission of building community through music.community partners program: lpglp reaches out to the community with our community partner program, whereby we bring other non-profit organizations onto our lawns to outreach to our audience.economic development program: lpglp has an economic development arm, where we bring local business to our summer-long music festival as vendors, to expose our audience to their growing businesses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $574K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.