PING Providing Instruments For The Next Generation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 208476094
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Oak Park, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7085243001
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Music
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $181,347
- Expenses
- $109,156
- Assets
- $269,836
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Michelle Dybal (Executive Director)
- Sarah Shirk (President)
- Nadine Peacock (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Michelle Dybal (Executive Director)
- Sarah Shirk (President)
- Nadine Peacock (Vice President)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide instruments and music education to children in need.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provide band and orchestra instruments, along with maintenance, repairs, upgrades, and accessories for thoseinstruments to 4th - 12th graders who face financial barriers
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 70% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 26
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 77
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 21.8%; rating input score 22
- Program expense ratio: 31.8%; rating input score 32
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.8%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.47; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 40.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 21.8% of revenue deployed · 31.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.