Hamilton Symphony Orchestra Assoc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
316053052
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hamilton, OH, USA
Phone
5138631717
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$309,222
Expenses
$301,274
Assets
$41,553
Liabilities
$46,215

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Teresa Bayer-IItzsch (Secretary/Incoimg Board Chair)
  • Steve Grant (New Development Director)
  • Chris Bernosky (Board Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission is to bring live, high quality, symphonic music to an underserved population, and to act as a facilitor of educational engagement in the region. engagementIn the facilitor role, the BPO encourages youth participation in music and the arts throughscholarships, the great Miami Youth Symphony and other youth activities and programming

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided both free and ticketed symphony orchestra music concerts to the Hamilton-Fairfield community and surrounding areas. Each concert, presented by professional paid musicians led by a professional conductor, exposes, educates, and encourages all people through various classical, pop anc chorale music art forms. We also actively reach beyond these events to promote musical education and community involvement with activites such as the Great Miami Youth Symphony Orchestra, The Hamilton Fairfield Symphony Orchestra Chorale and Scholarships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $241.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.11; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $246K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.