Rev1 Ventures

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311658220
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
6144873700
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,912,927
Expenses
$11,097,596
Assets
$34,045,153
Liabilities
$2,469,271

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM WALKER (CEO & PRESIDENT)
  • JULIA DEWEY (VICE PRESIDENT, CORPORATE PARTNERSHIPS)

Highest reported compensation

  • TOM WALKER (CEO & PRESIDENT): $828,829 total reported compensation
  • DAVID DILLMAN (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $354,758 total reported compensation
  • RYAN HELON (EVP, INVESTMENT FUNDS): $350,300 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We help entrepreneurs of central Ohio tech start-ups build great companies through our unique venture development services, business incubator and capital attraction.

What it reported doing in 2024

Fund management- rev1's investment team handles the intake, vetting and investment due diligence for multiple investment funds targeting a broad range of high-growth tech startups, including it and health it, biosciences, advanced materials, agribusiness, and advanced and alternative energy. Rev1 also handles the daily accounting and coordinates annual tax returns.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 97.2%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.07; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $829K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $110K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.