Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611334712
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Ft Mitchell, KY, USA
Phone
8595788800
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$200,627
Expenses
$217,326
Assets
$84,578
Liabilities
$15,993

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENT COOPER (CHAMBER PRESIDENT)
  • MAURICE KIRCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENT COOPER (CHAMBER PRESIDENT): $188,731 total reported compensation
  • MAURICE KIRCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $164,291 total reported compensation
  • LYNSEY MCCLUNG (CFO): $119,006 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To positively enhance the nky business climate by increasing the region's workforce and leadership pipeline; northern Kentucky chamber of commerce foundation, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit affiliate of the northern Kentucky chamber of commerce, serves as a backbone organization with a mission to positively enhance the business climate in northern Kentucky by developing in-demand workforce talent and community leaders dedicated to economic growth and regional sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2024

The nky chamber foundation facilitated a $25,000 grant from duke energy (received 7/1/24) & matching $25,000 grant from blue north to support small business by providing (8) grants ranging from $5,000-$10,000 to local minority-, women- and veteran-owned businesses. The chamber reviewed eligibility and a separate selection committee determined grant recipients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: 14.1%; rating input score 14; 38th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $212K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.