Community Investment Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454105820
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Charlottesville, VA, USA
Phone
4342183481
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,095,081
Expenses
$2,554,804
Assets
$3,843,834
Liabilities
$1,053,087

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN DAVIS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN DAVIS (PRESIDENT): $143,780 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Community investment collaborative's mission is to strengthen our community and contribute to economic development by fueling the success of under-resourced entrepreneurs through education, mentoring, micro-lending and networking.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cic has two core financing programs: a microloan program that provides loans up to $50,000, and a microgrants program that helps under-resourced entrepreneurs test their products or services. In 2025, 42 businesses received $1,555,315 in loans and 17 businesses received $22,795 in microgrants. Cic's lifetime total lending to date includes $6.578 million in loans.cic partners with local governments and other entities to manage grant programs that provide access to capital to businesses in the region. In 2025, we partnered with entities to provide capital to 25 businesses through $173,014 in grants.in 2025, cic launched a master participation agreement with bridging Virginia, a mission-driven lender based in richmond, va. Under this agreement, cic made $25,000 in loans participating alongside bridging Virginia loans, enabling a combined total of $50,000 in loans to under-resourced entrepreneurs in the richmond area. Cic provided loan servicing support to bridging Virginia through the first quarter of 2025, during which time it supported $651,692 in total loans, with $474,716 in outstanding balances at the time that servicing arrangement concluded. At the end of 2025, cic managed $407,413 in assets under management with other lending partners.

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 91% 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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.7%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 70.4%; rating input score 70; 24th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.5; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.7% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.