Omaha Girls Rock Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453838678
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4022358122
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Music

Reported finances

Revenue
$279,075
Expenses
$282,405
Assets
$13,240
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HALLEY TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CHALIS BRISTOL (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEX BAUER (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • HALLEY TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $33,205 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Omaha girls rock's mission is to empower young women to find their unique voices through creativity, music education and performance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Omaha girls rock serves over 80 youth per year to give them the confidence to use their voices through music education and performance. Through workshops and one-on-one instruction, the organization and its volunteers cultivate the do-it-yourself values that form the core of the independent music experience: confidence, self-reliance, and original thinking, while encouraging students to apply these values in all aspects of their lives. At least 50% of the young women involved each year receive partial to full scholarships to attend the week-long summer camps. Omaha girls rock partners with various and diverse community organizations to provide education in the arts, diversity awareness, and technology in music.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -1.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 70.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $200K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.