Impact Ventures Accelerator Dba Impact Ventures

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830699171
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
4697088815
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,236,522
Expenses
$1,039,982
Assets
$1,750,741
Liabilities
$728,453

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Benjamin Vann (Founder & CEO)
  • Roy Lopez (President)
  • Ted Hill (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Benjamin Vann (Founder & CEO): $168,333 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 empower talented, yet under-estimated Women and Communities of Color to build generational wealth through inclusive entrepreneurship, community wealth building, and integrated capital.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, Impact Ventures continued to advance its charitable mission of reducing barriers to entrepreneurship for underrepresented founders through training, mentorship, and access to capital. The Organization delivered networking events, business education, and capacity-building programs to more than 300 entrepreneurs across North Texas, provided technical assistance and capital readiness services through its accelerator programs, and distributed over $82K in grants and $145K impact investment funding to women- and minority-owned businesses. In 2024, ImpactVentures also launched IV Capital, a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) initiative to expand inclusive lending and economic development opportunities for historically excluded communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.2%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 65.7%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 45.3%; rating input score 45; 28th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.9%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 30% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.2% of revenue deployed · 65.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $683K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.