Virginia Equine Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 472280629
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Warrenton, VA, USA
- Phone
- 5403474313
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Business and Industry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,623,195
- Expenses
- $44,299,474
- Assets
- $32,222,530
- Liabilities
- $7,891,263
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEBORAH EASTER (PRESIDENT)
- JOHN B HANNUM III (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN B HANNUM III (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $187,800 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the Virginia equine alliance is to sustain, promote, and expand the horse breeding and horse racing industries in the commonwealth of Virginia. The alliance seeks to establish and support new and multiple venues for horse racing in the commonwealth and to advocate and support legislation, regulations, and rules beneficial to the breeders and owners and trainers of horses ("horsemen") in the state. The alliance represents the interests of horsemen at meetings of the Virginia general assembly, the Virginia department of agriculture, the Virginia racing commission, racing associations, breeder's organizations, horsemen's organizations, and other like groups. The alliance is committed to increasing public awareness of the economic and environmental importance to the commonwealth of the horse breeding and horse racing industries.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Virginia equine alliance advances the common business interest of its members, including sustaining, promoting, and expanding the horse breeding and racing industry in the commonwealth of Virginia.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 87% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 69
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: 88.1%; rating input score 88; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 6 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $172K reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.