Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860336429
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Fountain Hills, AZ, USA
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$764,114
Expenses
$626,822
Assets
$1,046,419
Liabilities
$423,216

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH LAVOIE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH LAVOIE (PRESIDENT): $124,108 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The nbsp; chambers nbsp; primary nbsp; goal nbsp; is nbsp; to nbsp; support nbsp; the nbsp; success nbsp; of nbsp; local nbsp; member nbsp; businesses nbsp; we nbsp; accomplish nbsp; that nbsp; goal nbsp; by nbsp; paying nbsp; attention nbsp; to nbsp; local nbsp; regional nbsp; state nbsp; and nbsp; national nbsp; legislation nbsp; that nbsp; directly nbsp; impact nbsp; the nbsp; economy nbsp; and nbsp; business

What it reported doing in 2023

Holiday classics main

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 63.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $443K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 30 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.