Peninsula Technology Incubator

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455282723
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Hampton, VA, USA
Phone
7573256990
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,858
Expenses
$125,582
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS O STANLEY (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUGLAS O STANLEY (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT): $475,902 total reported compensation
  • KERRY L CHRISTIAN (TREASURER): $282,630 total reported compensation
  • CATHERINE HOPKINS (DIRECTOR & SECRETARY FROM 5/18/22): $228,547 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The peninsula technology incubator (pti) was commissioned by the city of hampton industrial development authority (hampton ida) to nurture the start-up and growth of emerging technology businesses in the hampton roads area. The organization provides startups with the resources they need to position themselves as they implement their business plan and work towards raising capital.

What it reported doing in 2021

Hampton ida grant: pti provides clients with office accommodations, access to laboratories, and business consulting services. Pti assists clients with business plans, marketing development and capitalization. It has catalyzed the organization and management of a regional accelerator, 757 accelerate, providing additional business and entrepreneurial services in conjunction with pti. Part of this relationship provides first stage investors to provide seed funding and early stage funding of companies in the region thus ensuring that nascent businesses have needed capital to facilitate the delicate early stages of company growth and development. Pti also supports entrepreneurial education and outreach in the hampton roads area. Pti engages with nia's researchers and graduate students, as well as undergraduate and k-12 students to advance the technology commercialization objectives of both nia and the city of hampton. Pti develops, organizes and implements business technology showcase events, business plan competitions at five local universities and colleges, and is working in collaboration with a number of stem programs in the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 105.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.2% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $476K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $210K reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.