California Choral Directors Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821921574
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
La Habra, CA, USA
Phone
6572170767
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$468,679
Expenses
$479,485
Assets
$315,588
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS PETERSON (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ARLIE LANGAGER (President)
  • KRISTINA NAKAGAWA (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BUDDY JAMES (Director): $1,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Empowers choral musicians to create transformative experiences for California's diverse communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ccda sponsors two regional high school honor choirs on the weekends, one is in the san francisco bay area and the other is in the central valley area. Each region features three high school honor choirs. The weekend program provides unique learning opportunities for high school students from across the state of California to sing in selected choirs under the direction of nationally and internationally known choral conductors. Students pay a nominal fee to audition in late september at varous sites all across the state of California, demostrating their skills to a 2-judge panel who issue a score based on standardized rubic. Students who qualify are placed in one of the three choirs based on voice type and past participation. Each student indicates whether they wish to be considered for all state honor choirs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -2.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $403K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.