Fond Du Lac Concert Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391083304
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Fond Du Lac, WI, USA
Phone
9209232887
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,346
Expenses
$107,014
Assets
$133,816

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM SCHERMERHORN (PRESIDENT)
  • BOB OBERBECK (PRESIDENT EL)

People named in this filing

  • CHRISTINE SCHERMERHORN (ASSISTANT TR)
  • ANN MENKE (DIRECTOR)
  • BARB MILLAGE (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Proliferation of fine arts within locality.

What it reported doing in 2025

The association presents five or six concerts each season. Over the years programming has included symphony orchestras, classical, jazz, big bands, pop, folk, dance, vocal and instrumental soloists and groups, chorale, ballets, popular musicals, show bands, ethnic and cultural ensembles of national and international performers to fond du lac audiences. The association is committed to presenting a variety of world-class performances of exceptional musical quality.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.8%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.25; rating input score 53; 53rd 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: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $105K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 30 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.