Sisters Voices Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273186007
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Phone
9196193438
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$133,702
Expenses
$134,374
Assets
$45,244
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LEANDRA STROPE (Artistic Exec Dir)
  • KRISTIN TRANGSRUD (ChairGrants Mgr)
  • JENNIFER SHEN (Treasurer)

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

Choral comty educating &celebrating young female voices

What it reported doing in 2025

Coordinate and prepare singers for at least 3 ensemble performances throughout the year for girls in kindergarten through 8th grade. Over the year, singers progress through our sight-singing curriculum, using John Feierabends Conversational Solfege as groundwork, and experience ensemble work that is fun and engaging while preparing girls for excellent singing individually and as an ensemble.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.9%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $117K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.