Towle Performing Arts Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812201036
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Hammond, IN, USA
Phone
2199378780
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Theater

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$222,071
Expenses
$251,412
Assets
$66,239
Liabilities
$8

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK SWIBES (PRESIDENT)
  • JEN BUSSEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMILY NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $64,859 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Towle performing arts company is established to provide year-round entertainment and theater related educational opportunities to residents in and around hammond, Indiana including northwest Indiana and the greater chicagoland area.

What it reported doing in 2025

Towle performing arts company has an education department, which engages young theater artists ranging in age from 12 - 18 from all over northwest Indiana, chicago and the south suburbs of chicago. This program allows these talented and passionate artists to create and discover with a wide range of their peers that cross various social, racial and economically diverse lines. This program produces two full productions a year, as well as provides various educational workshops, classroom performances and various outreach activities. During 2025, 15 young artists participated in the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 63.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $160K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.