Greater Washington DC Black Chamber of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823593199
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Washington, DC, US
Phone
(202) 560-5629
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$555,901
Expenses
$654,647
Assets
$6,657
Liabilities
$56,924

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AISA BOND (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AISA BOND (PRESIDENT): $170,861 total reported compensation
  • SIMONE ELLISON (DIRECTOR OF ENGAGEMENT AND STRATEGI): $98,794 total reported compensation
  • DANIELLE WALKER (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION): $97,090 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote black business growth in the District of Columbia through the facilitation of business opportunities and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Programs are designed to support and promote black businesses in dc. Our goals are to retain and strengthen businesses and improve business growth opportunities.technical assistancethe business development center (sbdc) - with michael butleroffered six (6) 30-minute sessionsthe small business association (sba) - with david hincapieoffered six (6) 30-minute sessionspanels/sessions: legislative series with councilmember brooke pinto, ward 2dc apex accelerator overview with james goodman, manager, dc apex accelerators program divisionsports wagering 101: opportunities abound with keith howardmeet dslbds innovation & equitable development entrepreneurship is for everyonedemystifying the certified business enterprise (cbe) programpanel discussion: dc department of licensing and consumer protection. Pros and cons of business structuresevent stats: ototal # of events 5osum of registrants/attendees 40ocost to run programing - free w/eaglebank partnership

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.1%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 41.4%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 8.55; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 56%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -21.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 49.1% of revenue deployed · 41.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $271K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.