De Soto Chamber of Commerce

Legal name: De Soto Chamber of Commerce Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431938765
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
De Soto, KS, US
Phone
913-583-1585
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$417,821
Expenses
$424,683
Assets
$309,660
Liabilities
$83,661

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIM HOLVERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURA BLATTER (CEO)
  • SARA RITTER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TIM HOLVERSON (PRESIDENT): $61,959 total reported compensation
  • SHELLY DORIS MILBURN (INTERIM DIRECTOR & BOARD MEMBER): $53,016 total reported compensation
  • SARA RITTER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $30,005 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To serve as a welcoming entry point into De Soto’s dynamic and fast-growing region, supporting local businesses, fostering partnerships, and championing initiatives that move our city forward.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide chamber members with access to community events via newsletter and to provide community with targeted industry studies in order to assist the city of de soto in narrowing down the types of industries to attract to the city for relocation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.3%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 67.3% of revenue deployed · 66.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $281K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.