Diversity and Ethnic Chamber of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872609166
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5126891193
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,450
Expenses
$17,042
Assets
$121,383
Liabilities
$1,500

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tam Hawkins (President)

People named in this filing

  • MONICA ANDRY (Director)
  • Todd Hogan (Secretary)
  • Tam Hawkins (President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support the endeavors of the diversity chambers of the Greater Austin Area

What it reported doing in 2025

The Diversity and Ethnic Chamber Alliance (DECA) is comprised of the Austin LGBT Chamber of Commerce, Greater Austin Asian Chamber of Commerce, Greater Austin Black Chamber of Commerce, Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. DECA is the heartbeat of Austins economic landscape, championing diversity and inclusion to help shape the citys future. Rooted in a mission to foster diverse economies, DECA stands as a pillar of support for Austins vibrant community of businesses, entrepreneurs, and innovators.From groundbreaking tech startups redefining innovation to local artisans preserving culture and tradition, DECA embraces the full spectrum of Austins entrepreneurial spirit, recognizing the collective impact these communities have on the citys identity and growth.As Austin continues to evolve, DECA evolves alongside it, working to ensure that opportunity is not only created, but shared across the diverse communities that make our region thrive.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.4%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 58.3%; rating input score 58

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 71.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.12; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.4% of revenue deployed · 58.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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 16/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.