Saint Paul Conservatory for Performing Artists

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820555555
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
651-290-2225
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,307,823
Expenses
$4,112,845
Assets
$4,487,631
Liabilities
$2,922,931

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CALLIE JACOBS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CALLIE JACOBS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $193,836 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN GORANSON (DEAN): $162,707 total reported compensation
  • MONICA LONERGAN (DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL EDUCATION): $144,117 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

SPCPA provides authentic arts training taught by current professional artists utilizing the conservatory model while aligned with academic state standards in English, math, science, social studies, world languages, and more.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide a high school education that includes training pre-professional artists in the areas of instrumental and vocal music, theatre and dance, visual arts, and creative writing. During the fiscal year ending june 30, 2025, saint paul conservatory for performing artists served 313 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 11 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.