National Association for Music Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526045043
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Herndon, VA, USA
Phone
7038604000
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,937,796
Expenses
$6,610,972
Assets
$9,171,951
Liabilities
$2,795,859

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Deb Confredo (President)
  • Cecil Adderley (President-Elect)
  • Scott Sheehan (Immediate Past President)
  • Christopher Woodside (Executive Director)
  • John Donaldson (Asst Executive Director of Prof Dev)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christopher Woodside (Executive Director): $253,793 total reported compensation
  • Chaudlier Moore (CFAO): $224,254 total reported compensation
  • Amanda Karhuse (AED-Advocacy & Public Policy): $148,276 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

NAfME is a collaborative community that supports music educators and advocates for equitable access to music education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Capacity Building: Ensure data-driven fiscal practices and decision-making to advance the Association and the profession it serves. Build and maintain relationships and technological capacity that enable the Association, state affiliates, and individual members to achieve differentiated goals within a unified national structure, -Increase membership across existing and new categories. - Develop national and state leadership, - Maintain a fiscally sound Assocciation. - Secure funding to support NAFME initiatives and projects - Exemplify the Associations mission, vision, an values.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 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: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 52
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 60.3%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.3% of revenue deployed · 60.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $254K · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.