The Chamber Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460476778
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Poughkeepsie, NY, USA
Phone
8454541700
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,605,661
Expenses
$1,561,477
Assets
$1,749,871
Liabilities
$222,782

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANK CASTELLA JR (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • FRANK CASTELLA JR (CEO): $180,262 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER MCCORMACK (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $102,405 total reported compensation
  • CHELSEA SCHWARZE (COO): $90,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To assist the dutchess county regional chamber of commerce, inc. In the building and support of a qualified workforce by fostering educational opportunities through scholarships, and also coordinating a workforce development program that instructs and educates.

What it reported doing in 2025

Other program services: to foster educational opportunites in the service area through the establishment of scholarship programs. Scholarships in the amount of $32,299 were awarded to individuals to further their academic endeavors. Fundraisers are held to support and ensure the continued availablity of the funds for scholarships in addition to transfers from scholarship accounts. 14 scholarships were awarded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 2.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47% of revenue deployed · 47.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $746K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.