The South Dakota Chorale

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452709374
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Sioux Falls, SD, USA
Phone
7128987335
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Singing, Choral

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,725
Expenses
$39,104
Assets
$16,689
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • HEATH WEBER (BOARD OF DIRECTORS, CHAIR)
  • MARY KAY FAUSCH (DIRECTOR)
  • STEPHANIE JACKSON-FISCHER (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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To enrich the cultural lives of south dakotans through choral music performance and education.

What it reported doing in 2017

Appearances/activities during fy 2017-2018- the South Dakota chorale presented a concert in sioux falls, sd and sioux city, ia presenting works by baltic composers titled baltic prayers.- the sd chorale collaborated with two high school ensembles, the east high (sioux city) chamber choir and the o'gorman concert choir, and one college ensemble, the morningside choir, learning music together and presenting conerts together at each location.- in november, the South Dakota chorale was nominated for three grammy awards: best choral performance, best surround sound, and best engineering (classical). In january 2018, the artistic director attended the grammy awards ceremony in New York city. While the chorale did not win the coveted award, it was an honor to be included in the group of esteemed nominees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 86.2%; rating input score 86

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.1%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 59.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 86.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2015 to 2017
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.