Latin American Venture Capital Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020638053
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6463156735
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Small Business Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,998,213
Expenses
$2,507,782
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE H AMBROSE (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE H AMBROSE (PRESIDENT/CE): $213,662 total reported compensation
  • CAITLIN MITCHELL (EMPLOYEE): $119,393 total reported compensation
  • JULIE C RUVOLO (EMPLOYEE): $119,393 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the latin american venture capital association (lavca) is to support the growth of the latin american venture capital and private equity industry through efforts that include, without limitation, programs of research, education and networking.

What it reported doing in 2019

Lavca provides extensive educational and networking opportunities at the three major conferences that we organize and excute annually (networking and events). Attendance at our events hosted in chile and colombia have been raising steadily, with a variety of international and local firms attending, a true indicator of the interest in pe/vc in the region, as well as the value of the conferences that lavca puts on. In addition to putting on events, lavca focuses on providing value to its members by producing proprietary data focusing on treads and observations in the region (access to industry data, benchmarks and information).

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.