Youth Singers of the Bay Area

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261841031
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
9855162688
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Singing, Choral

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,682
Expenses
$80,531
Assets
$2,395
Liabilities
$2,395

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carol Barwick (Executive Director)
  • Margaret Jordan (Board President and Board Member)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kellie Cooper (Artistic Director): $10,750 total reported compensation
  • Cristina Bartimmo (Asst. Artistic Director): $8,000 total reported compensation
  • Karen Butler (Administrative Assistant): $7,600 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide high quality vocal music education programs for youth in grades 3 - 12. To promote an appreciation of high quality choral music in the community. To provide children in the community an opportunity to experience singing and music-making in a joyful and positive environment. To expose singers and audiences to a variety of cultures and genres of choral music. To promote excellence in music-making.

What it reported doing in 2025

Summer music camp had approximately 100 attendees who learned basic music appreciation of various musical instruments = violins, other stringed instruments, piano, guitar, bell chimes percussion instruments and vocal music. Many of them participated in a musical performance using dancing and singing skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% 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.
  • 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $81K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.