The Greater Coachella Valley Chamber Of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812688214
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Indio, CA, USA
Phone
7603470676
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,252,202
Expenses
$1,325,234
Assets
$250,822
Liabilities
$179,646

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brandon Marley (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Brandon Marley (CEO): $126,232 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 Greater Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce is a regional chamber formed in 2016 to support a diverse business community that spans nearly forty-five miles and serves the needs of nearly 500,000 visitors each year. As a business membership organization, we are supported through the generous investment and support of our members. We strive to enhance the local economy and overall business climate for our membership through legislative advocacy, education, economic development, networking, and other community-based opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

As a 501 c 6 non-profit organization, the Greater Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce is dedicated to improving the quality of life for the Coachella Valleys growing population. The members of the Chamber offer a vibrant business community that strengthens the local economy. The Greater Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce assists the local business community by offering education and resources to business owners, organizing, and promoting events, and connecting business leaders through multiple platforms.For the 24/25 fiscal year, the Chamber supported 917 active members, of which 94 were new. The Chamber served members from 11 distinct communities across the Coachella Valley. In advancement of the business community's interests, the Chamber regularly attended local city council meetings, convening of monthly legislative committee calls, and conducted advocacy efforts including publications and candidate forums.The Chamber hosted 9 major events with over 18,000 attendees during the same fiscal year.

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 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -5.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 26 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $212K reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.