Tribeca Film Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800006057
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2129413961
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,652,875
Expenses
$3,167,542
Assets
$183,631
Liabilities
$39,773

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY HOBBY (EXECUTIVE DIR. THRU 9/15/20): $162,217 total reported compensation
  • DAVID EARLS (MANAGING DIRECTOR THRU 9/15/20): $154,046 total reported compensation
  • JIM LOVEGROVE (FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU 9/15/20): $107,840 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Tribeca film institute, inc. ("tfi") is operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes, which includes championing underrepresented storytellers and increasing their access, exposure, and sustainability in the arts.

What it reported doing in 2020

Artist Programs: Identify independent storytellers from systemically excluded communities and provide them with access to funding, mentorship, labs, industry access, training, and platforms needed to tell their stories, connect with audiences, and build thriving careers. Flagship: Tribeca All Access, which supports early- and mid-career filmmakers and creators from historically underrepresented communities and whose projects are in all stages of development, production, or post-production.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.1%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 35%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: $72.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.5%; rating input score 98; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -29.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.4% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.1% of revenue deployed · 35% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 33 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 42/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.