The Washington Center for the Performing Arts
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911182866
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Olympia, WA, USA
- Phone
- 3607538585
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Performing Arts Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,854,502
- Expenses
- $3,820,468
- Assets
- $8,397,639
- Liabilities
- $1,065,901
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Jill Barnes (Executive Dir.): $159,587 total reported compensation
- Jocelyn Wood (Deputy Director): $114,589 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 mission of the Washington Center is to inspire audiences and artists of all ages through live performances, enriching the vibrancy of our community. The Washington center for the performing arts was created from a belief that a regional performing arts center was fundamental to the cultural pursuits of our community and vital to a better quality of life.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Washington center for the performing arts presents its own series of national and international touring artists from a broad spectrum of genres and styles. In the last 12 months we have presented world famous artists such as ben folds, aimee mann, gregory alan isakov, lyle lovett , the national broadway tour of dear evan hansen, the dance company body traffic, along with jazz, comedy, family oriented performances, national geographic explorers, and a huge variety of other genres. In addition, we have a long-term collaboration with indigenous performance productions (ipp) to develop new indigenous performances to tour throughout the country and beyond. The collaboration creates world premieres of theater, music, dance and multi-disciplinary performances by native and indigenous artists. This partnership is the first of its kind in the united states and seeks to fulfill a critical need in the field and help to reverse long standing barriers to indigenous performing artists entering the touring circuit.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work 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: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.3%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.2; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.3% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.