Jump to content

The DCI 990s


Recommended Posts

Fred,

As someone that prepares a 990 for a corps, I can tell you from first hand experience, there are many instances where there is not clarity on where certain items should be reported. Some categories are clear, while others are not (or do not exist on the form). When there are not categories on the form that fit your expense category, there is room on the form to create your own category. If you include it in miscellaneous expenses, you must then provide some detail on the nature of the expense. This is not to 'hide' anything - it's simply because you cannot plan for every possible category of expense. The most common ones are there, but even then there is lack of clarity on how they should be categorized (and there is significant diversity in practice as a result).

For example, there is a line for compensation to current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees, and there is a line for other salaries and wages. Different people can reach different conclusions as to who is a 'key employee', so their salaries could be classified in one of the two lines. If you review the corps 990's and try to find staff pay, you will notice it treated differently by the corps. There is not specific guidance in the instructions for the form on how to report salaried employees vs. independent contractors. Different corps (and their accountants) treat it differently. It's not to hide anything. It's simply trying your best to fit square pegs into round holes. There is nothing nefarious going on there.

So, garfield . . .

Is it not true, many items can be buried under several categories, with no one being the wiser? This inspection is fascinating, for sure. It's just that certain 'things' can be done and gotten away with? To some extent, I'm not comfortable in the utility of putting these figures out there. Yes, these figures ARE out there for inspection. It's just that . . . well, there's maybe more to the story. Do you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fred,

As someone that prepares a 990 for a corps, I can tell you from first hand experience, there are many instances where there is not clarity on where certain items should be reported. Some categories are clear, while others are not (or do not exist on the form). When there are not categories on the form that fit your expense category, there is room on the form to create your own category. If you include it in miscellaneous expenses, you must then provide some detail on the nature of the expense. This is not to 'hide' anything - it's simply because you cannot plan for every possible category of expense. The most common ones are there, but even then there is lack of clarity on how they should be categorized (and there is significant diversity in practice as a result).

For example, there is a line for compensation to current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees, and there is a line for other salaries and wages. Different people can reach different conclusions as to who is a 'key employee', so their salaries could be classified in one of the two lines. If you review the corps 990's and try to find staff pay, you will notice it treated differently by the corps. There is not specific guidance in the instructions for the form on how to report salaried employees vs. independent contractors. Different corps (and their accountants) treat it differently. It's not to hide anything. It's simply trying your best to fit square pegs into round holes. There is nothing nefarious going on there.

I thank you for your respectful explanation. At no time did I mean to imply anything done in an inappropriate way. I am fully aware listing everything within a limited number of broad categories is difficult, with certain compromises required. I've faced that challenge many times. That's the danger in interpreting these things just on their surface. There is a broader context involved. The general public tends to latch-on to a number, as just a number. Within their own experience, that number can unnessarily cause concern. Clearly, something needs to be put forth formally, and it is. There does remain, however, the risk of misinterpretation, undue fault, etc. Hopefully, most readers of this type of data, enjoy the story "For Entertainment Purposes Only," as they say.

The young fellow purchasing the huge house across the street (in example) might actually work the fryer at McDonald's. Such a purchase can be easy, and justified, if we only knew more. There's context to consider. The price paid (in of itself) is somewhat neutral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are 'Doner Expenses'? I would hope something like 'Doner Contributions' would be higher than this number...

I don't know entirely, but premiums for Friends would seem to fall into this category. Probably includes "free" seats, programs, etc.

Might also include dinners and other entertainment used to secure or schmooze donors, I suppose.

We'll see Donor Expense in a few posts, but I've already posted that Contributions and Grants totaled just over $357,000.

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Continuing with the big expense categories, next comes...

Donor Expenses

2009: $602,170
2010: $565,348 (minus $36,822 [6.1%] from 2009)
2011: $526,640 (minus $38,708 [6.8%] from 2009, minus $75,530 [12.5%] from 2009)

2012: $546,250

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know entirely, but premiums for Friends would seem to fall into this category. Probably includes "free" seats, programs, etc.

Might also include dinners and other entertainment used to secure or schmooze donors, I suppose.

We'll see Donor Expense in a few posts, but I've already posted that Contributions and Grants totaled just over $357,000.

Garfield, you are entirely correct.

Donor expenses include several things: solicitation mailings (these are often shipped out to a mailing house), donor premiums (the seats, free programs, DCI yearbook, etc. All goodies), and cultivation costs (the money they spend wooing potential/current donors).

A good way to think of this is, "How much does this organization spend to make $1?"

Average organizations typically run $.25-$.30 per dollar raised.

I do believe DCI has been in need of a shakeup in fundraising staff for a bit, but I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the four years, Contributions and Grants looks like this:

2009: $327,262

2010: $352,720

2011: $710,196

2012: $357,499

This is a bit misleading because, in 2011, Steve Vickers at Drum Corps World donated a collection to DCI that was valued at $350,000. Excluding that one-time contribution, this category appears remarkably static.

Continuing with the big expense categories, next comes...

Donor Expenses

2009: $602,170

2010: $565,348 (minus $36,822 [6.1%] from 2009)

2011: $526,640 (minus $38,708 [6.8%] from 2009, minus $75,530 [12.5%] from 2009)

2012: $546,250

Garfield, you are entirely correct.

Donor expenses include several things: solicitation mailings (these are often shipped out to a mailing house), donor premiums (the seats, free programs, DCI yearbook, etc. All goodies), and cultivation costs (the money they spend wooing potential/current donors).

A good way to think of this is, "How much does this organization spend to make $1?"

Average organizations typically run $.25-$.30 per dollar raised.

I do believe DCI has been in need of a shakeup in fundraising staff for a bit, but I could be wrong.

If it's possible to take these numbers at face value (are you listening, Fred?), it appears this relationship of contributions to donor expenses is upside down.

Is this an example of the numbers not telling the whole story and a whole bunch of stuff was thrown into the "Donor Expenses" category that don't really belong there, or the fundraising operation at DCI is completely ineffective? On it's surface and without having (yet) talked with DCI about it, these numbers don't seem to make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's possible to take these numbers at face value (are you listening, Fred?), it appears this relationship of contributions to donor expenses is upside down.

Is this an example of the numbers not telling the whole story and a whole bunch of stuff was thrown into the "Donor Expenses" category that don't really belong there, or the fundraising operation at DCI is completely ineffective? On it's surface and without having (yet) talked with DCI about it, these numbers don't seem to make sense.

That's where comparing numbers across organizations gets a little weird. I currently fundraise for a very large nonprofit, and sit on the board of a few smaller nonprofits. Those numbers really are upside down.

These numbers will never be released, but I wonder how many Friends of DCI members they have. There are quite a few DCI alums that've moved into lucrative positions after they age out...why not start a master participant database? Approach the younger ageouts for micro-donations. $25 bucks to fund...something. Instill the idea of giving back at a young age, and hook them before another organization scoops up their philanthropic dollars...

What I also want to see is DCI to roll out an enhanced Corporate Partner program. I take a look at the Corporate Partners page on the website and notice that they are doing great with support from music companies, and have very little outside of that. I'd like them to make a bit of an effort to build non-musical corporate partners in Indianapolis. Klipsch, the speaker manufacturers, are Indy based, along with a ton of other companies. With Finals based in Indy, put together a recognition concert Finals week for sponsors...get a few corps to pop in and play a tune or two and showcase the activity. Perhaps extend the sponsor showcase at Lucas Oil to include companies that might be recruiting for internships? Lots of kids that march aren't music majors, but are brilliant in other fields. Having the ability to recruit dedicated folks has to be worth something, right?

Free ideas. Steal away, any DCI fundraisers that might be reading...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...