Salt Lake Academy of Music

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843257116
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8015772263
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$369,085
Expenses
$365,511
Assets
$16,998
Liabilities
$3,141

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Steven Auerbach (Executive Dir.): $61,000 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 provide accessible, experiential music education and performance opportunities that help youth and adults develop musical skills, confidence, and community through collaborative learning.

What it reported doing in 2024

Salt Lake Academy of Music (SLAM) provided music education and performance opportunities to youth and adults in Salt Lake County through weekly private instruction, ensemble performance programs, and summer music camps. Hundreds of community members participated in lessons, group rehearsals, and public performances at local venues, festivals, and community events, many of which were free and open to the public. SLAM also provided need-based scholarships to youth participants to expand access to music education for families with financial barriers. Through instruction, ensemble collaboration, and public performance opportunities, SLAMs programs promote musical skill development, creativity, confidence, and social connection while serving a diverse cross-section of the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th 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: 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: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.7%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $295K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 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 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.