Virginia's Heartland Alliance
Legal name: Virginia Heartland Regional Economic Development Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 331555458
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Keysville, VA, USA
- Phone
- (434) 414-8556
- Rating
- 39
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Business and Industry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $245,437
- Expenses
- $219,726
- Assets
- $116,088
- Liabilities
- $58,617
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALEXANDER MCCOY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ALEXANDER MCCOY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $24,757 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Connecting people, partners, and opportunities to make Virginia’s Heartland a place where businesses grow, families thrive, and communities prosper. Meet the Board of Directors and staff who guide VaHA’s mission and support collaborative economic development efforts across Southern and Central Virginia. Meet Our Board & Staff Invest In Us. We help communities move their priorities forward by connecting them with the people, partnerships, and resources that support long-term success. Board & Staff. We connect people, partners, and opportunities to make Virginia’s Heartland a place where businesses grow, families thrive, and communities prosper. Our Vision.
What it reported doing in 2024
Retained professional consulting group to develop and implement the initial investor membership campaign for program services revenue. Obtained professional help with the completion and submission of the organizations exemption status application. Purchase of site selection software using gis latest commercial real estate income population demographics and labor data.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.4%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 2
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 1.4% of revenue deployed · 1.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $220K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.