The Independent Shakespeare Co Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201004993
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
8187106306
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Theater

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,625,926
Expenses
$1,007,295
Assets
$870,631
Liabilities
$36,915

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARA PRANGER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID MELVILLE (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $95,962 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA CHALSMA (ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $91,017 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We bring los angeles together through exuberant, surprising productions of classical plays as well as new works. We address the inequity of access to the performing arts through free and low-cost programming. We create theater that is dynamic, inclusive and accessible; enriching our community and reaching new theater audiences.

What it reported doing in 2024

Studio productions - the organization presented the following productions at the indoor studio theater: hamlet, solus adapted by david melville had 12 performances and approximately 375 attended. Happy days by samuel beckett had 14 performances and approximately 450 attended. A christmas carol with charles dickens had 14 performances and approximately 800 attended. The organization also hosted iambic lab, a series of workshops, readings, and salons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.6%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.6% of revenue deployed · 63% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $635K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 46 of 46 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.