Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 840764634
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Boulder, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3034432122
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Art Museums
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,280,559
- Expenses
- $1,576,114
- Assets
- $2,894,797
- Liabilities
- $309,429
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARIA COLE (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID DADONE (EXECUTIVE DI): $160,098 total reported compensation
- GWYNETH BURAK (DEPUTY DIREC): $132,665 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bmoca presents exhibitions & education programs across the region, engaging audiences with art, offering artists opportunities to create, and providing hands-on experiences to foster creativity.
What it reported doing in 2025
Bmoca offers 7 distinct art education outreach programs. Six of the metro area counties are recipients of one or more of these programs, six of the seven programs are provided at no cost to the participants due the generosity of bmoca supporters. The programs are developed to serve multiple audiences from youth to seniors with memory loss, and focus on ensuring participants gain new knowledge about the themes and techniques of contemporary art, as well as appreciate their own unique abilities to participate in art creation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.9%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 30.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.9% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 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.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.