Sacramento Youth Symphony

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680233148
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9167315777
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Symphony Orchestras

Reported finances

Revenue
$572,440
Expenses
$445,696
Assets
$955,959
Liabilities
$124,009

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE KAPHAR (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT VANN (MANAGING DIR): $65,158 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Across a broad demographic spectrum of youth, we seek to cultivate musical talent, promote love for music, and advance a sense of unity, and increase capacity for a lifetime of success.

What it reported doing in 2024

The sacramento youth symphony is to educate and advance the musical skills of youth, throughout the entire sacramento valley community in ways that engage, challenge, and inspire them to reach their highest potential. The organzation achieves this by offering several levels of string, wind and orchestral ensembles, allowing to accomodate intermeidate and advanced players as well as less seasoned youth musicians with at least on year of experience. Sacramento youth symphony students learn from talented music educators and conductors, gain exposure to music history and theory and perform challenging orchestral works in several exciting concerts every year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 60% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.9%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 60.1%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.1%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.9% of revenue deployed · 60.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $268K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.