Development Ventures Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561461066
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9196831551
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,862,543
Expenses
$2,315,861
Assets
$23,990,842
Liabilities
$10,876,935

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY SCOTT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANTHONY SCOTT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $209,607 total reported compensation
  • ANTHONY SNELL (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $162,584 total reported compensation
  • KAREN LADO (DURHAM CHOICE PROJECT MANAGER): $156,188 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 mission of development ventures incorporated is to develop and operate affordable housing communities serving residents of durham, North Carolina.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mission of development ventures incorporated is to develop and operate affordable housing communities serving residents of durham. Development ventures incorporated currently serves as the owner of lincoln apartments, the goley pointe project, and laurel oaks apartments. The entity is involved in the development of 1010 worth street and is the developer for the preiss-steele place redevelopment project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 71% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - 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: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 52.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.36; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47% of revenue deployed · 94.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 19 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.