Venture Central Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510252306
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Charlottesville, VA, USA
Phone
4342330676
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$611,234
Expenses
$584,435
Assets
$339,545
Liabilities
$19,738

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rebecca Haydock (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Touve (434 Managing Director): $162,598 total reported compensation
  • Rebecca Haydock (CEO): $158,976 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Venture Central's mission is to serve and strengthen the Central Virginia entrepreneurial community by building and bridging connections, programs, funding, and spaces. We collaborate with regional entrepreneurs and business support partners for the advancement of the entrepreneurial ecosystem in Central Virginia.

What it reported doing in 2025

Venture Central convened stakeholders and offered advisory support to projects, programs, and ESOs that support the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. It facilitated a regional CEO forum consisting of growth-stage CEOs and convened industry and entrepreneurship groups to support education, connection, and coordination - designed to advance a more collaborative and supportive ecosystem in which businesses can thrive. In 2025 Venture Central conducted the Homegrown Innovators event, formed a regional CEO Advisory Board which shared needs and policy considerations, coordinated an entrepreneur service organization advisory group to enhance information sharing and collaboration, developed and expanded an ecosystem resource map, completed the Regional Entrepreneurship Initiative grant, applied for two grants, and supported advancement of a statewide angel network project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $51.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 4.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $499K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.