Bbb of Central Arizona Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942860635
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6022642864
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$282,163
Expenses
$257,890
Assets
$256,903
Liabilities
$82,787

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW FEHLING (Secretary): $806,227 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of bbb foundation is to educate individuals and businesses about marketplace issues and charitable giving practices and to reinforce bbb's mission of advancing marketplace trust.

What it reported doing in 2024

The bbb foundation is a supporting organization of the better business bureau, inc. In support of the better business bureau, inc., since 1982. Bbb foundation has provided written materials, visual AIDS, and speakers to inform the public about wise buying, investments, fraudulent practices, and unethical schemes. The foundation uses its savvy consumer programs to provide comprehensive marketplace information to specific groups such as kids, teens, and seniors. Additionally, the foundation conducts an annual business ethics awards program to recognize local companies who go above and beyond to ensure an ethical marketplace.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $806K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.