Vega Productions

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870745621
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6128109070
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$66,469
Expenses
$52,260
Assets
$92,930
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAITLIN MARLOTTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAITLIN MARLOTTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $30,623 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Rebuild and revitalize musical instruments and art programs in Minnesota public schools

What it reported doing in 2018

To refurbish musical instrumants to be used by students for music classes in public schools

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 21.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 58.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.5% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2018
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.