American Chamber of Commerce in Poland
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 980118849
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Springfield, IL, USA
- Phone
- 3026365400
- Rating
- 43
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,454,177
- Expenses
- $1,306,395
- Assets
- $1,516,921
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
People named in this filing
- MARTA POSLAD (CHAIRPERSON)
- JOLANTA JAWORSKA (TREASURY)
- JOHN LYNCH (VICE-CHAIR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The american chamber of commerce in poland seeks to be the leading voice for international investors in poland, representing its member companies, the investor community at large and demonstrating the positive role that business and commerce play in the development of the country and society.
What it reported doing in 2024
The amcham pharmaceutical committee is a platform that brings together key players in the pharmaceutical market in poland. Its mission is to foster dialogue aimed at improving the business environment and encouraging investment in the pharmaceutical industry, with a focus on patient welfare, regulatory stability, and predictability in business operations. This is achieved by promoting transparency in the legislative process and encouraging decision-making in consultation with public sector partners. In 2024, the pharmaceutical committee continued to advance its goals by organizing conferences, stakeholder meetings, and discussions with public sector representatives. It also collaborated with other industry bodies, prepared position papers for public consultations on legislative acts, and published reports-such as the healthy legislation 5.0 report-analyzing the quality of law-making in the healthcare sector.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.2%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and related organizations
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.