Social Venture Partners International
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680492186
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2064710410
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $814,566
- Expenses
- $1,285,467
- Assets
- $340,910
- Liabilities
- $37,236
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ciara Garcia (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Adriana Lobson-Ceballos (Director): $256,300 total reported compensation
- Ciara Garcia (CEO): $121,950 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Social Venture Partners International supports a global network of affiliates that engage philanthropists to drive systemic community change through grantmaking, pro bono consulting, and donor education.
What it reported doing in 2024
Affliate Wellbeing - SVPI completed a 9-month learning initiative for affiliate leaders, which included: a comprehensive affiliate survey; implementation of a new dues process and membership agreements and the development of a collective impact framework to guide future network-wide impact efforts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -57.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $916K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $256K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $466K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.