Seattle Ladies Choir

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611862400
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2063959530
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Music

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,397
Expenses
$54,973
Assets
$64,031
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Erin Coffman (Chair)
  • Safiya Jetha (Vice Chair)
  • Rebekah Nicodemus (Finance 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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Seattle Ladies Choir is made up of 50+ members with varying musical experience, from shower singers to professional musicians. It is a non-audition choir that strives to provide a supportive community for members and to connect through music.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Seattle Ladies Choir welcomes a variety of talents, backgrounds, experiences, and personal characteristics, including but not limited to race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, ability, socio-economic background, and geographic origin. We require members to be 21+ years of age. We support causes such as LGBTQIA rights, musical education for girls and women, and empowering diverse communities through music.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.1% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.