Asheville Area Chamber of Commerce Community Betterment Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561762978
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8282586119
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,585,458
Expenses
$2,495,076
Assets
$2,326,738
Liabilities
$1,262,555

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathryn Cramer (Secretary): $352,049 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Develop and accelerate growth & employment opportunities for the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. Funded the following activity through the asheville area chamber of commerce: 1) workforce preparedness and development, 2) entrepreneur and startup development, 3) recruitment of new industry, 4) expansion of existing industry, and 5) research. 2. Launched optimist ventures, a program that helps long-term ambitious growth ventures based in western North Carolina succeed by offering start-up funding and education through a rigorous 12-weeek accelerator complemented by $50,000 ($25,000 as grant, $25,000 as investment.). Served 7 ventures in fiscal year 2025. 3. Responded to the regional disaster of hurricane helene by launching the mountain strong fund for business recovery. Raised and distributed $1,162,685 to more than 55 small businesses and 16 regional chambers of commerce. 4. In cooperation with the folk heritage committee, promoted traditional mountain music and dance through the shindig on the green performances and the mountain dance and folk festival. 5. Provided 15 businesses owned by people of color advertising benefits and memberships in the asheville chamber through the people's community and inclusion initiative.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 99.3%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: $146.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.9% of revenue deployed · 99.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $352K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.