Cathedral Choral Society of Washington Dc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521136231
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025375524
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Singing, Choral
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,368,863
Expenses
$1,633,376
Assets
$2,699,773
Liabilities
$258,104

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH HOLMES (PRESIDENT)
  • JEREMY GOSBEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER EANES (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER EANES (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $131,129 total reported compensation
  • KATHELEEN WELLING (FORMER DEPUTY EXEC DIR ARTISTIC ADMINISTRATI): $127,863 total reported compensation
  • STEVEN FOX (MUSIC DIRECTOR): $104,375 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We create transcendent musical experiences for all people in a space of beauty and community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education-one of the organizations' strategic focuses is to inspire and support singing in schools. Initiatives include hosting a festival for dc high school choirs, partnering with school choir directors to understand their challenges and needs and strengthen what they are doing, and connecting with students and providing resources for them to sing in school and with the cathedral choral society.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 65.5%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -19.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 65.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $124K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.