South County Chambers of Commerce
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 952289035
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Arroyo Grande, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8054891488
- Rating
- 43
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $526,066
- Expenses
- $711,574
- Assets
- $618,789
- Liabilities
- $60,835
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
People named in this filing
- KIM BANKS (MEMBER)
- JOSH ERDMAN (VICE CHAIR)
- JEFF CHAMBERS (PAST 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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote tourism and other business throughout the south county of san luis obispo
What it reported doing in 2024
The purpose of the south county chambers of commerce is to represent commercial, industrial, and professional businesses by promoting the economic welfare of the area.
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 and revenue has grown recently. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 58
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -35.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.