We Are Instrumental

Legal name: We Are Instrumental Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874486115
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Ticonderoga, NY, US
Phone
518-217-2959
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Music

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$206,897
Expenses
$190,800
Assets
$135,181
Liabilities
$2,028

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL ITURRINO (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • EVAN MACK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • EVAN MACK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $54,461 total reported compensation
  • CHLOE LEWIS (OPERATIONS COORDINATOR): $27,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We Are Instrumental is creating change by providing students with access to musical instruments, fostering educational opportunities, and supporting music programs in underserved communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Wai collected approximately 120 instruments. We repaired 100 instruments and purchased 30 of them outright to address the needs of our target schools. Many of the instruments collected were ready to go and donated directly to schools with no repairs needed. Wai hosted our third music summit (october 2025). We paid an honorarium to 25 guest artists and 1 instrument-repair technician. Wai supported 30 students with virtual private lessons with college professors. We hosted 2 enrichment field trips to see a show at proctors. We trained 40 students in instrument-repair training through our harmony restored program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 7.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 34.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 82.6% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $170K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.