American Musical Instrument Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
132896023
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Ipswich, MA, USA
Phone
9783562874
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$73,067
Expenses
$108,918
Assets
$387,838
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES B KOPP (PRESIDENT)
  • JONATHAN SANTA MARIA BOUQUET (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES B KOPP (PRESIDENT)
  • JONATHAN SANTA MARIA BOUQUET (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NURIA BONET (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the american musical society, inc., is to promote the knowledge of all aspects of musical instruments, particularly pertaining to the collecting, history, performance, use, construction, and restoration of musical instruments of all ages and all people.

What it reported doing in 2025

Gribbon fund: the gribbon funds are awards for student travel. Students (foreign and domestic) are awarded each year to enable graduate and undergraduate students to attend the society's annual meeting and includes reimbursement of conference related expenses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -49.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.56; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.