Social Venture Partners of Sacramento

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812953732
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2021
Location
El Dorado Hills, CA, USA
Phone
9162377339
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Corporate Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$682,754
Expenses
$676,131
Assets
$402,596
Liabilities
$340,050

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACK CRAWFORD (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
  • JAY THOMAS (VICE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTO)
  • BRAD SQUIRES (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRAD SQUIRES (CEO): $56,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Unite the collective power of nonprofits and philanthropic changemakers to accelerate community impact in the greater sacramento region.

What it reported doing in 2025

Svp fast pitch - fast pitch is sacramento venture philanthropy's flagship nonprofit capacity-building and fundraising program. Selected nonprofits participate in a structured training and coaching process designed to strengthen messaging, clarify measurable outcomes, and improve fundraising effectiveness. The program culminates in a public showcase event where organizations present to community members and donors. Fast pitch combines financial investment and pro bono expertise to increase long-term sustainability and organizational impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.6%; rating input score 90; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.5% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $522K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.