Kern County Black Chamber of Commerce
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 352163526
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Bakersfield, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6613261529
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $75,211
- Expenses
- $68,947
- Assets
- $7,584
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tomeka Powell (President/CEO)
People named in this filing
- Tomeka Powell (President/CEO)
- Frederick Prince (Board - Chairman)
- Diane Williams (Board - Co-Chair)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Kern County Black Chamber of Commerce (KCBCC) operates as a chamber of commerce and a business assistance center. It's primary activities center around educating and providing resources and materials to businesses and individuals who are interested in starting or operating businesses in low-to-moderate income communities in Kern County.
What it reported doing in 2015
KCBCC conducted workshops and programs which provide assistance to over 150 businesses and individuals from low to moderate income communities on starting and operating a business.
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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 8
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 8.1%; rating input score 8
- Program expense ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 9
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -40.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 8.1% of revenue deployed · 8.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.