UVA Community Credit Union
Legal name: University of Virginia Community Credit Union
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 540674170
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Charlottesville, VA, US
- Phone
- 888-887-9136
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Financial Institutions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $87,769,379
- Expenses
- $72,747,917
- Assets
- $1,504,857,896
- Liabilities
- $1,378,198,723
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SUSAN GRUBER (CEO/PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- SUSAN GRUBER (CEO/PRESIDENT): $1,095,623 total reported compensation
- PETER HOLMAN (CFO): $831,768 total reported compensation
- JOSEPH MICHAEL RAICHEL (CHIEF LENDING OFFICER): $484,242 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the financial well-being of our members and communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
During 2024, university of Virginia community credit union, inc., a state-chartered credit union located in central Virginia, provided financial services to members who live, work, or attend school in the counties of albemarle, amherst, augusta, bath, bedford, buckingham, campbell, culpeper, cumberland, fauquier, fluvanna, greene, highland, louisa, madison, nelson, orange, rapphannock, rockbridge, rockingham, as well as the cities of charlottesville, harrisonburg, lynchburg, staunton, & waynesboro. The credit union continued to fulfill its exempt purpose by providing credit at fair and reasonable rates of interest, offering competitive share deposit products, and providing members with the opportunity to improve their economic condition. As of the end of 2024, the credit union served 81,518 members.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: 84.7%; rating input score 85; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 17.1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.69; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 29 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.4M reported
- Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.