Vermillion Cultural Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474247389
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vermillion, SD, USA
Phone
6056243331
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$164,175
Expenses
$187,108
Assets
$407,026
Liabilities
$12,935

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Shannon Cole (Executive Director)
  • Ruth Hamel (President)
  • Susan Tuve (Vice-President)
  • Susan Heggestad (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Shannon Cole (Executive Director): $34,002 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To make Vermillion the creative center of the region by developing and supporting cultural opportunities for the community. The Vermillion Cultural Association, Inc. is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. The purpose of this corporation is to foster, promote, and increase the public knowledge and appreciation of the arts, film and cultural activities in Vermillion through offering a variety of cultural experiences.

What it reported doing in 2024

To foster, promote and increase the public knowledge and appreciation of the arts, film, and cultural activities in Vermillion, SD through offering a variety of cultural experiences

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.18; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 64.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.