Piedmont Virginia Community College Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521241773
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Charlottesville, VA, USA
Phone
4349615203
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,999,556
Expenses
$3,001,783
Assets
$34,507,938
Liabilities
$221,177

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAKIE BROOKS (PRESIDENT)
  • PEGGY ECHOLS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RAY MISHLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CAROLYN RAINEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HARRY STILLERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEAN RUNYON (SECRETARY): $256,446 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT JEFFERIES (TREASURER): $201,202 total reported compensation
  • HARRY STILLERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $200,216 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The piedmont Virginia community college educational foundation was established in 1982 to cultivate and provide financial and in-kind support for piedmont Virginia community college. The foundation is organized and operated to foster and provide the growth, progress and general welfare of piedmont Virginia community college.

What it reported doing in 2025

The piedmont Virginia community college educational foundation was established in 1982 to cultivate and provide financial and in-kind support for piedmont Virginia community college, and is organized and operated to foster and provide for the growth, progress and general welfare of the college. The foundation helps ensure a margin of excellence at pvcc by providing funds, personnel or other assistance for strengthening, developing and enlarging the college and its current and future programs; assisting in the support of current college activities and undertakings or in the establishment and support of new activities and undertakings; purchasing or making contributions toward the acquisition of books, supplies, and equipment or the construction of buildings and facilities, which will contribute to the educational and administrative resources of the college; providing scholarships and financial assistance for students of the college; and generally, contributing to any and all proper projects, functions, services, and activities carried on or sponsored by the college.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 26th 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: -0.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.5; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $256K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.