National US-Arab Chamber of Commercenon
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521529937
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2022895920
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $625,924
- Expenses
- $508,046
- Assets
- $869,103
- Liabilities
- $21,746
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID HAMOD (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID HAMOD (President & CEO): $158,250 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 National U.S.-Arab Chamber of Commerce nal U.S.-Arab certifies documents for shipping goods and materials to various Arab countries, It also sponsors conferences to promote trade, cultural and investment ties between Arab countries and the USA.It serves as a commercial and cultural bridge between the USA and Meddle East & North Africa MINA.
What it reported doing in 2024
Business facilitation- promoting good ethics and well-informed business decisions. The nusacc team offers a range of services designed to help u.s. And arab business leaders, including certification services, standards services, research services, translation services, training services and trade & investment services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 32
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 32.7%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 40.3%; rating input score 40
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.8%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 31.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 32.7% of revenue deployed · 40.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.