Sacramento Jazz Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911776322
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9165715533
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Music Groups, Bands, Ensembles

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$198,559
Expenses
$342,393
Assets
$1,278,230
Liabilities
$209

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATTI JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • WILLIAM AU (PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY PARKER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATTI JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,382 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To preserve and promote traditional jazz music primarily through adult and youth education programs and scholarships.

What it reported doing in 2024

Teh annual traditional jazz camp held every summer at the sacramento county office of education site in sly park, ca. Around 150 kids ages 12-18 each spend a week studying jazz performance under the tutelage of professional musicians and instructors. Many kids attend on scholarships funded by the foundation and individual donors. At the youth camp, students are formed into 10 or 11 bands, and at the end of the week, these bands return to sacramento by bus to perform at a special afternoon concert in sacramento.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd 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: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -72.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.73; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $283K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.