Westhampton Beach Performing Arts Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113353161
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Westhampton Beach, NY, USA
Phone
6312882350
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,792,582
Expenses
$3,930,567
Assets
$12,842,830
Liabilities
$382,330

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIENNE PENZA-BOONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIENNE PENZA-BOONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $263,218 total reported compensation
  • FRANK RUSSELL IV (PROD & FACILITIES DIRECTOR): $133,790 total reported compensation
  • TIFFANY ATTARDO (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $127,953 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The westhampton beach performing arts center is a year-round, community-based, not-for-profit 501(c)3 arts organization, founded in 1997, that serves patrons on the east end and beyond. We are a vibrant venue committed to providing a greater understanding and appreciation of the arts and meeting the cultural aspiration of the area by: presenting world-class performing arts, music, dance, comedy and cinema from around the world.providing premier arts education programs to the widest and most diverse audiences, regardless of socio-economic status.contributing positively to the local economy and enriching the community's quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supporting the arts by funding performances in exchange for advertising, promoting a deeper understanding and appreciation of creativity.

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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.1%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 49.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.27; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.1% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $263K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.