Charleston Symphony Youth Orchestra

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270159978
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8437237528
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Symphony Orchestras

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$34,176
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANINE NAGRODSKY (PRESIDENT)
  • ELLEN DRESSLER MORYL (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JANINE NAGRODSKY (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT G HILL (TREASURER)
  • ELLEN DRESSLER MORYL (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the charleston symphony youth orchestra is to provide serious middle and high school music students within the tri-county area an opportunity to perform symphonic music with a high standard of musical excellence, supporting the experience of music education within the community and schools. The csyo aspires to serve as the region's premiere youth orchestra, providing excellent concert performances in the state of South Carolina and beyond, as well as enhancing its musicians opportunities to compete for scholarships and other advancement possibilities.

What it reported doing in 2017

The csyo performs a symphonic concert at the gaillard center, charleston sc, providing middle and high school orchestra members the experience of performing orchestral masterpieces for the entertainment of an audience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 23

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -28.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -75.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -70.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2015 to 2017
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.