U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation

Legal name: US Chamber of Commerce Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461561597
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, United States
Phone
(202) 463-5707
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,251,033
Expenses
$44,438,918
Assets
$62,454,280
Liabilities
$10,151,651

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Suzanne Clark (Director, CEO)
  • Carolyn Cawley Westermann (President)
  • Michael Carney (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Suzanne Clark (Director, CEO): $8,391,682 total reported compensation
  • Justin Waller (COO): $2,070,118 total reported compensation
  • David Detweiler (General Counsel/ Secretary): $1,051,130 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Harnessing the power of business to move from vision to real impact in communities across America and around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Civic Trust - the Civic Trust is a nonpartisan educational initiative committed to increasing civic literacy, skills, and participation in schools, workplaces, and communities. Its largest initiative is the National Civics Bee, a nonpartisan national competition for middle school students that also engages their parents and other adults in civic learning.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 30.2%; rating input score 30; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -5.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 98.2% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $39M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $8.4M · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.7M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 62 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 58 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 30/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.