Alexander Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742243837
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7207576255
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$139,168
Expenses
$139,338
Assets
$401,586
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • ANDREW SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT MONTOYA (CHAIR)
  • PHIL VIRAY (VICE CHAIR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The alexander foundation exists to enhance the lives of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people by providing financial assistance to those in need throughout Colorado. We are an all volunteer organization and through the spirit of giving, it is our mission to build a community of strength and dignity.

What it reported doing in 2024

2024 holiday giving campaign - in fiscal year 2024, alexander foundation provided financial suport to 15 lgbtq+ coloradoans in need to assist with their holiday expenditures and other financial difficulties as determined by their appeal letter and recommendation by a referral agency partner.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.4%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 64.4%; rating input score 64

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.88; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.4% of revenue deployed · 64.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.