The Silent Film Festival

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943170215
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4157774908
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Grantmaking Foundations N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$655,912
Expenses
$611,628
Assets
$453,686
Liabilities
$82,309

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mike Mashon (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stacey Wisnia (Exec Director): $147,032 total reported compensation
  • Anita Monga (Artistic Director): $109,410 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

SFSFF is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the presentation and preservation of silent cinema, and the education of the public about silent film as an art form and as a culturally valuable historical record.

What it reported doing in 2024

The San Francisco Silent Film Festivals mission is to demonstrate the artistry, diversity, and enduring cultural value of silent movies with live musical accompaniment and to ensure that they are accessible to current and future audiences. We pursue this mission by partnering with international archives to fund and restore silent films as well as by supporting film preservation efforts through the exhibition of major restorations and archival prints. Throughout the year, we carefully curate high-quality presentations of silent films from the world's leading archives and educational programs that give our audience a more complete picture and a deeper understanding of the art form, its history, and current efforts to study, preserve, and exhibit these rare and vulnerable films. Reflecting the breadth and

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% 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 - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 57.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $351K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.