Hmong Wisconsin Chamber of Commerce Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392013787
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4146458828
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,940,433
Expenses
$2,672,694
Assets
$6,613,621
Liabilities
$2,561,029

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAYSEE HERR (CEO)
  • DAVID KIRCHER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAYSEE HERR (CEO): $114,039 total reported compensation
  • KRISTY VANG (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $87,505 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Hwcc is a community development financial institution (cdfi) providing economic development assistance in business planning, market analysis, marketing strategies, effective day-to-day business operations and much more. Hwcc acts as an advocate for the hmong and asian american communities in Wisconsin regarding business and economic issues. Furthermore, hwcc is a forum for hmong and asian american entrepreneurs to discuss successes and challenges, offering support resulting in a win-win for all of Wisconsin.

What it reported doing in 2024

The hmong Wisconsin chamber of commerce (hwcc) delivers integrated access to capital and business technical assistance to underserved small businesses across Wisconsin. As a certified cdfi, hwcc provides micro and small business loans. In the reporting year, hwcc disbursed over $1,178,000 in loans to 12 entrepreneurs, maintaining a portfolio-wide default rate under 12%. Hwcc also supported approximately 129 entrepreneurs and businesses through one-on-one consulting, financial coaching, training workshops, and loan readiness services. This program advances financial inclusion, business growth, and economic resilience for underserved entrepreneurs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.2%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.47; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $114K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.