The Grand Oshkosh Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391569883
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oshkosh, WI, USA
Phone
9204242355
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,468,593
Expenses
$1,413,223
Assets
$1,884,634
Liabilities
$723,014

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH FERLO (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSEPH FERLO (PRESIDENT & CEO): $155,864 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The grand oshkosh promotes, enhances, and fosters appreciation for the performing arts by entertaining and educating audiences in the fox valley region and by preserving its historic, jewel box threatre in downtown oshkosh.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grand presented events - organize and present performances by national and international touring artists at the historic grand opera house. The grand hosted performances including educational programming and community artist outreach activities. Promote, operate, and maintain the historic grand opera house in oshkosh, wi. Opera house management - promote, operate, and maintain the historic grand opera house in oshkosh, wi.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 56.5%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 42.8%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 56.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $798K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.