Detroit Regional Chamber Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382352462
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3139644000
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,179,877
Expenses
$15,285,683
Assets
$7,928,051
Liabilities
$1,353,967

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SANDY K BARUAH (PRESIDENT)
  • MEGAN SPANITZ (VICE- PRESIDENT, RESOURCE)
  • GLENN STEVENS (VICE- PRESIDENT, AUTOMOTIV)
  • GREGORY HANDEL (VICE PRESIDENT, EDUCATION)

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDY K BARUAH (PRESIDENT): $684,962 total reported compensation
  • TAMMY CARNRIKE (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $459,196 total reported compensation
  • KAREN BELANS (TREASURER): $398,055 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Detroit regional chamber foundation, inc. (the "foundation") is dedicated to growing programs or initiatives that are important to ensuring the detroit region's economy is one of the fastest growing in the u.s.

What it reported doing in 2024

Economic development: the foundation's economic prosperity strategy positions the detroit region for long-term global competitiveness for the next decade and beyond. The work is funded through contributions and grants from corporate donors and private philanthropy. The strategy is executed through a series of initiatives ensuring the region is educated, employed, healthy, and leading in next-generation mobility.leadership detroit: leadership detroit provides the foundation for a lifelong commitment to leadership by creating awareness of key issues that affect the detroit region and to challenge emerging and existing community leaders to bring about positive change in the community through informed leadership.economic equity and inclusion: the foundation leverages its position as a covener of business to ensure pervasive and long-term change both societally and economically. This work is rooted in reflective focus on accountability internally and externally through a commitment to ensuring the region's equitable future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $63.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 35.9%; rating input score 36; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.8% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $685K · 11 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.