Startup Tucson

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460801496
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Phone
5204778278
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$833,964
Expenses
$832,187
Assets
$647,626
Liabilities
$66,861

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH POCOCK (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH POCOCK (CEO): $195,629 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Working to transform the region's economy through entrepreneurship and innovation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tenwest festivaltenwest is startup tucson's annual community innovation festival that convenes entrepreneurs, business leaders, creatives, investors, students, and community stakeholders to advance entrepreneurship and economic development in southern Arizona. Through educational programming, workshops, keynote presentations, networking events, and community partnerships, tenwest provides opportunities for participants to build skills, share knowledge, develop professional connections, and engage with emerging ideas shaping the region's future. The festival supports startup tucson's mission to foster innovation, strengthen the entrepreneurial ecosystem, and promote economic opportunity throughout southern Arizona.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 66.8%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 48.9%; rating input score 49; 32nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 66.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $556K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.