Hampton Roads Executive Roundtable
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810938538
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Norfolk, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7579618181
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $904,112
- Expenses
- $964,039
- Assets
- $1,023,008
- Liabilities
- $14,209
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
41 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NANCY GRDEN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- DONNNA S MORRIS (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- NANCY GRDEN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $259,750 total reported compensation
- DONNNA S MORRIS (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $151,660 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the region's trajectory of economic growth and competitiveness through thought leadership, establishing and monitoring the economic development and innovation strategy in an equitable manner, and fostering collaboration among economic development partners.
What it reported doing in 2024
Virginia initiative for growth and opportunity: hampton roads executive roundtable serves as the support organization for go va region 5. The time committed to fulfill that role includes processing and managing grants and providing staff support to the regional council. Only a portion of the costs incurred for staffing and grant management support are recovered through remittances issued to the commonwealth of Virginia. ($ 532,552 was spent in 2024 by the roundtable for salaries/benefits and specific operational costs shared with go va. Of that amount the roundtable was reimbursed $ 250,000). (continued on schedule o)jefferson lab high performance data facility (hpdf): the roundtable engaged teconomy partners to identify opportunities for regional economic development leverage of the hpdf supercomputing capabilities. The investment tied to this project is $ 154,900, with $ 99,900 reimbursed through a go Virginia planning grant. The product being the development of a situational analysis and recommendations for a regional innovation and commercialization initiative and possible development of an innovation district adjacent to jlab, considered a major resource in attracting and growing businesses and talent requiring these capabilities.maritime entry to employment training program (meet): the meet project has transformed how the hampton roads region prepares workers for high-demand maritime trades by creating an accelerated, technology-enabled training pipeline. By combining simulation-based training, hybrid online and in-person delivery, and direct industry engagement, meet created a replicable model that shortens learning curves, improves job readiness, and increases student engagement in traditionally difficult-to-fill trades. Meet exceeded the goal metrics of both students served, and businesses served. The total investment in this project was $ 1,704,740, with $ 1,090,527 coming from a go Virginia per capita grant.additional summaries, if needed: national defense industrial strategy (ndis): the roundtable convened meetings with us fleet forces command to discuss alignment of the business community with the ndis. Similarly, the roundtable has worked to connect military leaders with regional quality of life initiatives (i.e., childcare, housing, and mental health). We also coordinated with the hampton roads alliance's initiative for a "regional investment playbook" that aligns with our regional assets, including go Virginia funding in the amount of $100,000. Out-migration and talent attraction/retention initiative: a regional steering group led by the roundtable and hampton roads workforce council (hrwc) was established to identify: (1) talent retention and attraction initiatives and budget; and (2) potential funding and advocacy. State funding options with Virginia economic development partnership (vedp) were pursued, including a pilot project in hampton roads with current fiscal year vedp funds.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.2%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 63%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 42.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 67.2% of revenue deployed · 63% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 34 of 34 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $607K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 41 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.