Midland Chamber of Commerce Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752181063
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Midland, TX, USA
- Phone
- 4326833381
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,272,035
- Expenses
- $764,442
- Assets
- $7,414,235
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EVAN THOMAS (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
- ROBERT BURNS (FORMER PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ROBERT BURNS (FORMER PRESIDENT AND CEO): $217,521 total reported compensation
- EVAN THOMAS (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $213,536 total reported compensation
- REBECCA THOMAS (FORMER EXECUTIVE VP ADMINI): $175,252 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The midland chamber of commerce foundation provides vision and leadership to strengthen and enhance the quality of life and economic development for businesses and individuals in the community.
What it reported doing in 2024
The midland chamber of commerce foundation sponsors the teacher adoption program and partners in education program. The teacher adoption program was formed with the goal to strengthen teachers' ties to the community through encouragement and development of relationships. Partners in education exists to provide liaisons between local campuses and businesses. A granting program is also housed under the umbrella of partners in education which provides funds for teacher projects that meet specific criteria established and vetted by the midland chamber's education committee.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 74% 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
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 27
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 29.7%; rating input score 30
- Program expense ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 31
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.7; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -15.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 29.7% of revenue deployed · 31.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $240K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $218K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $170K reported
- Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.