Austin Community Growth Ventures

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475042107
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Austin, MN, USA
Phone
5074339495
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$151,725
Expenses
$182,055
Assets
$212,825
Liabilities
$7,655

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN GARRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - DCA)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN GARRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - DCA): $135,310 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Austin community growth ventures (acgv) was established as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization by the development corporation of austin with the overall goal to promote, encourage, and aid in the creation of an innovative ecosystem that supports education, creates quality jobs, and increases the new application of biotechnology, agircultural technology, and food science. Acgv will serve as a key facilitator in affording early stage companies and developed companies a chance to succeed by providing education and training in idea development assistance, patent submission, business planning assistance, and financing.

What it reported doing in 2024

To serve as a research accelerator for biotechnology companies involved in economic development by providing office and laboratory space and access to equipment, research collaboration with faculty and staff of the hormel institue, a program of the university of Minnesota and students, faculty and staff of riverland community college, a member of Minnesota state colleges and universities in the city of austin, Minnesota. Provides business education to small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -20%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $177K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.