The Phoenix Boys Choir Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860256421
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6022645328
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Singing, Choral

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$888,841
Expenses
$1,118,096
Assets
$2,676,304
Liabilities
$101,371

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • HERBERT WASHINGTON (ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $99,980 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL KLOCK MCNEILL (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $69,260 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 phoenix boys choir transforms the lives of boys and young men from diverse backgrounds, fosters the highest level of musical excellence, and develops character, leadership, and golbal awareness.

What it reported doing in 2024

The grammy award winning phoenix boys choir provides exceptional music education and performance opportunities for boys and young men ages 7 to 18. Our comprehensive programs offer training in vocal performance, music theory, sight-reading, and leadership, nurturing the next generation of talented musicians and community leaders. Through world-class instruction and inspiring performances, the phoenix boys choir helps our choristers develop musical excellence, discipline, teamwork, confidence, and cultural awareness. Members perform throughout the phoenix area, across the nation and around the world, serving as ambassadors for arizonas arts community. Today, the phoenix boys choir includes approximately 100 choristers across multiple ensembles, providing each participant with an unparalleled artistic education and transformative personal experience. By shaping well-rounded musicians and citizens, the phoenix boys choir continues to enrich the cultural life of our community and elevate arizonas reputation on the national and international stage.

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 98% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.39; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 62.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $698K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.