Tubac Chamber of Commerce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860426190
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Tubac, AZ, USA
Phone
5203982704
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$286,724
Expenses
$231,262
Assets
$190,590
Liabilities
$36,972

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY L WADE (PRESIDENT)
  • LINCOLN WILSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KIM ROSEMAN (TREASURER)
  • REAGAN BANNISTER (DIRECTOR)
  • RANDY L WADE (PRESIDENT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the tubac chamber of commerce is to engage in all activities relating to the perpetuation, preservation and promotion of tubac and its business. Particular attention shall be given to the economic, civic, commercial, cultural and local historial interests.

What it reported doing in 2025

During fiscal year 20252026, the tubac chamber of commerce continued to promote and sustain tubac, Arizona as a premier high-desert destination where art, culture, and history meet. Key achievements include: major event organization & community support: successfully hosted signature events, including the annual tubac festival of the arts, driving tourism to local merchants and galleries while coordinating festival parking fees that directly benefited local non-profit organizations. Tourism & economic development: advanced marketing and outreach initiatives promoting tubacs vibrant arts scene, historic sites (including proximity to the tubac presidio state historic park and tumaccori mission), local dining, lodging, and outdoor adventure, strengthening santa cruz countys business environment. Member & visitor resources: maintained and upgraded digital, physical, and mapping resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 28.2%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 34.7%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 19.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 28.2% of revenue deployed · 34.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 28/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.