San Francisco Opera Guild at the War Memorial Opera House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941189846
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4155656433
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,142,900
Expenses
$2,171,274
Assets
$7,353,126
Liabilities
$45,202

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

Leadership & pay

81 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • COURTNEY LABE (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Susan Malott (Executive Dir.): $163,479 total reported compensation
  • Caroline Altman (Director Education): $155,340 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The san francisco opera guild was organized to provide opera education, develop and encourage audiences and provide fundraising, volunteer assistance and generate broad-based support for the san francisco opera association.

What it reported doing in 2024

The san francisco opera guild provided opera education programs to over 60,000 tk-12 students in 150 schools in the san francisco bay area and northern California and provided scholarship support to over 43% of those students. They also developed and encouraged audiences, and provided fundraising, volunteer assistance and generated broad-based support for the san francisco opera association.

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 99% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.3%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 47.6%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.39; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.3% of revenue deployed · 47.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 81 of 80 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 81 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.