North Carolina Chamber

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560340499
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9198361403
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,084,129
Expenses
$7,790,931
Assets
$7,085,816
Liabilities
$2,560,921

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

Leadership & pay

54 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GARY SALAMIDO (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
  • RAY STARLING (GENERAL COUNCIL/PRESIDENT, NC CHAMBER LEGAL INSTIT)
  • MEREDITH ARCHIE (SENIOR VP OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS/PRESIDENT FOUNDATION)
  • JAKE CASHION (VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS)
  • BETH SHORE (VICE PRESIDENT OF MEMBER ENGAGMENT)
  • KATE PAYNE (VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • GARY SALAMIDO (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $472,100 total reported compensation
  • RAY STARLING (GENERAL COUNCIL/PRESIDENT, NC CHAMBER LEGAL INSTIT): $361,713 total reported compensation
  • MEREDITH ARCHIE (SENIOR VP OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS/PRESIDENT FOUNDATION): $224,184 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 organization is a proactive, nonpartisan business advocacy organization. The organization works in the legislative, regulatory and political arenas to proactively drive positive change to ensure that North Carolina is a leading place in the world to do business. The vision is to be a unifying voice of North Carolina's diverse business community. The organization wants to take a forwardlooking, proactive role on issues that will positively impact the state's business climate and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership services- developing relationships with members to understand their business concerns and communicate relevant information including potential law changes that affect their business.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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: 68
  • Accountability: 99
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 74.1%; rating input score 74; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.7%; rating input score 98; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 43 of 44 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $472K · 54 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $469K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.