Cedille Chicago Nfp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363925368
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7739892515
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Printing, Publishing

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,464,638
Expenses
$1,265,630
Assets
$8,223,883
Liabilities
$74,251

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES GINSBURG (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES GINSBURG (President): $198,817 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM MAYLONE (REC. ENGINEER): $157,367 total reported compensation
  • JULIE POLANSKI (DIR. OF DEVELOP.): $112,793 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cedille Chicago, NFP is devoted to the activity of producing and marketing recordings of classical music by Chicago-area musicians and composers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cedille Records releases an average of eight recordings per year. Recording projects are artist-driven, generated directly from the artists' interests and aesthetic sensibilities. Driven by desire to further artists' careers, Cedille continually seeks to add new artists to its roster. Cedille bears production, distribution, and promotion expenses associated with each recording, drawing from continued support by individuals and organizations, plus album sales revenue. Recordings are never removed from Cedille's catalog. Each album is intended to serve as a permanent addition to the world's catalog of classical music. Cedille works closely with artists and invests heavily in promoting each release to ensure that each will have the maximum impact on the artists' careers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.2%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 37.6%; rating input score 38
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.6%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.5; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.2% of revenue deployed · 37.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $476K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $186K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.