San Jose - Silicon Valley Center for Ent Dev

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770574409
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2015
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4089309924
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Small Business Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,804
Expenses
$19,680
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARL DAVIS JR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • CARL DAVIS JR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • NORMAN GREEN (MEMBER)
  • ANDRE GREEN (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Silicon valley center for entrepreneurial development (svced) works to achieve the goal of increasing the number of successful small businesses[: comma:] especially minority and african american businesses[: comma:] in silicon valley while developing a pipe-line of future entrepreneurs through better education and training. For nearly 25 years[: comma:] svced have encouraged and equipped hundreds of small minority businesses and those looking to start businesses with turbo charged programs to be competitive in this now global landscape.

What it reported doing in 2016

Next gen program has taught business and financial literacy to high school students and young adults of all ethnicities. Next gen teaches how to write business and marketing plans while sharing how to budget save and use your money for financial independence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 75% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.6%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 61%; rating input score 61

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40%; rating input score 89; 89th 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: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.6% of revenue deployed · 61% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.