Charleston Symphony Orchestra
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 576000192
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Charleston, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8437237528
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Symphony Orchestras
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,762,301
- Expenses
- $5,501,752
- Assets
- $11,300,661
- Liabilities
- $1,687,968
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR BOBBY BAKER (PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL A SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
- ANNE W CLEVELAND (VICE PRESIDENT)
- CHRIS STAUBES (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL A SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $177,417 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The charleston symphony's mission is to inspire and engage the community through exceptional musical performances and educational programs.
What it reported doing in 2024
The symphony is committed to providing high-quality artistic and educational programming that is accessible to individuals of all ages and backgrounds. Each of the symphony's 24 core musicians dedicates approximately one-third of their professional time to education and community engagement initiatives, collectively reaching more than 20,000 students annually across berkeley, charleston, and dorchester counties.the charleston symphony youth orchestras program includes two ensembles serving advanced middle and high school musicians in the lowcountry: charleston symphony youth orchestra (csyo) and charleston symphony youth sinfonietta (csys)during the season, 96 students in grades 4-12 participated in weekly rehearsals and multiple public performances. Students performed at the charleston gaillard center and carnegie hall in New York city. Csyo and csys members also performed alongside professional symphony musicians during a masterworks concert conducted by maestra joann falletta.students participated in an annual retreat focused on ensemble development and musicianship. Many also performed in chamber ensembles throughout the community. The csyo completed its first tour to New York city, including a performance at carnegie hall.the symphony presented two sold-out young people's concerts in partnership with the charleston gaillard center and carnegie hall's link up program, featuring the orchestra moves. Approximately 3,000 students from 21 schools participated. Title i schools received complimentary tickets and transportation assistance. Participating teachers attended a curriculum workshop at the beginning of the school year to support classroom integration of program materials.cso musicians performed free educational programs at 54 schools throughout the tri-county region, reaching nearly 9,500 students, approximately 50% of whom attend title i schools. Programs are tailored to grade level and curriculum needs and include ensemble performances, sectional coaching, and instructional support for school music programs.the symphony continued its executive management fellowship (fourth year) and orchestral fellowship (third season). During the year, five orchestral fellows and two executive fellows were selected through a competitive process. Fellows participate in main series performances, education programs, community initiatives, and professional development activities designed to prepare emerging arts leaders and musicians for careers in the nonprofit performing arts sector.
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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. 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: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 27 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $533K reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.