Washington Music Educators Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
916029531
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Renton, WA, USA
Phone
2066173116
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,367,797
Expenses
$1,745,241
Assets
$256,110
Liabilities
$215,380

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT KETRON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • Meghan Wagner (President-Elect)
  • Ron Gerhardstein (Past President)
  • Frank Lewis (President)
  • Sarah Berglund (Vice President)
  • Syd Thayer-O'Brien (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT KETRON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $87,039 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To support music educators in an effort to ensure that every student in Washington state has access to a comprehensive, sequential music education taught by a highly qualified instructor and certified teacher.

What it reported doing in 2024

Biennial wmea state music conference and biennial nafme northwest music conference; includes music workshops, performances, and other activities. Yme (young musicians excelling) provides financial assistance to help students defray the cost of participating in wmea all-state and nafme all-northwest music student groups.these grants and the budgeted financial support available are determined by the executive director based on financial need, as requested by the students and their music teachers, after factoring in support from school, family, and other local sources.yme also provides general financial support to wmea all-state and nafme all-northwest honor groups to help reduce costs for all participating students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75.7%; rating input score 76; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 43 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.