Greater Wash Hispanic Chamb of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223860377
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027280352
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,223,593
Expenses
$1,401,108
Assets
$393,137
Liabilities
$247,965

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NICOLE QUIROGA (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • NICOLE QUIROGA (PRESIDENT & CEO): $235,045 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Support the economic development of the wash dc region by facilitating the success of latino and other minority-owned businesses and the communities they serve through networking, advocacy, education and acess to capital.

What it reported doing in 2024

The chamber held luncheons, seminars and other functions where speakers informed members on varie topices geared toward groth of the members businesses. The chamber also provided services to benefit the Washington convention center authority (wcaa) to promote tourism in the dc area

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. 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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 38
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 1st 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 120.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 45.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 26 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.