Sacramento Taiko Dan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680229584
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9165643786
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Folk Arts

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,517
Expenses
$74,849
Assets
$10,405

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MISSY ANAPOLSKY (Director)
  • KAREN FALKENSTROM (Director)
  • TIFFANY TAMARIBUCHI (Director)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sacramento taiko dan educates the public and preserves the art of tradiitonal and contemporary styles of taiko drumming including the study of japanese folk music, dance and history and the art, culture and music of other ethnic minority groups.

What it reported doing in 2015

Sacramento taiko dan staged productions in the metropolitan sacramento area, reaching an audience of over 85,000 and a larger audience through broadcast media. Through their expanded class and rehearsal schedule they offered several open workshops and classes for the sacramento community and provided classes and workshops for a number of taiko groups throughout north america and canada. Performing members also appeared in san francisco, Florida, san diego, tucson, seattle, berkeley, moab, portland, vancouver (bc), and various cities in japan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

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

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.