Fox Cities Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391248133
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Appleton, WI, USA
Phone
9207347101
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,988,164
Expenses
$2,115,174
Assets
$1,606,421
Liabilities
$742,676

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BECKY BARTOSZEK (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • BECKY BARTOSZEK (PRESIDENT/CE): $310,000 total reported compensation
  • TOM LEHR (EXECUTIVE VP): $189,875 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Fox cities chamber of commerce and industry, inc. Is dedicated to developing, advancing, and promoting the economic, industrial, commerical, professional, cultural, and civic welfare of the fox cities area.

What it reported doing in 2025

The primary purpose of the fox cities chamber is to support and sustain local businesses to make our community a great place to live and work. As the foremost advocacy organization for businesses in the fox cities, the chamber actively works to promote and cultivate a thriving business climate while protecting and advancing the interest of the members and the community as a whole. The fox cities chamber works in conjunction with citizens, businesses, educational and governmental partners to provide a positive business environment and improve the quality of life in the fox valley. The goal of the fox cities chamber is to provide leadership and to serve as a catalyst in uniting organizations, groups and individuals for effective action where there are challenges and opportunities. The fox cities chamber of commerce primarily serves businesses of all sizes operating in or doing business in the following areas: appleton, kaukauna, menasha and neenah; the towns of buchanan, clayton, grand chute, greenville, harrison, kaukauna, menasha, neenah, and vandenbroek, and the villages of combined locks, hortonville, kimberly, little chute and sherwood.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 70.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $310K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.