Lancaster Opera Company Dba Opera Lancaster

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236392136
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
Phone
7173920885
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,132
Expenses
$27,430
Assets
$62,163
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN DARRENKAMP (PRESIDENT / ARTISTIC DIREC)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN DARRENKAMP (PRESIDENT / ARTISTIC DIREC)
  • CAROLYN MOODY (TREASURER)
  • KATHY SEABER (SECRETARY)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide development and career advancement opportunities for local, regional and national singers and musicians. To also provide performance opportunities for local music professionals who are raising families in the area and want to maintain and hone their artistic skills without extensive travel.

What it reported doing in 2018

Opera lancaster is committed to providing opportunities to up-and-coming opera performers (vocalists and instrumentalists), from local students to young professionals who are building their opera career. Opportunities for student vocalists include participation in our chorus and master class opportunities with world-renowned opera singers. We also give voice lessons to regional and national singers who are building their operatic career.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 56.1%; rating input score 56

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -81.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.27; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 57.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 56.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.