Bridges of Opportunity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992721003
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Lafayette, CO, USA
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$137,556
Expenses
$116,185
Assets
$27,742

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew McCullough (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Andrew McCullough (Executive Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bridges of Opportunity serves as a bridge to the community and the world by being a nonprofit for nonprofits. We do this by assisting local grassroots work as a model c fiscal sponsor and by serving all local nonprofit leaders with community colaboration and coaching.

What it reported doing in 2025

Geo sapiens provided programming and activities to integrate environmental education energy education and job readiness primarily for youth. They also integrated environmental and energy education with a newly developed program entitled "Birds and Energy," which has been presented in Boulder County and to Audubon Society Chapters across the U.S. Integrating environmental and energy principles with job readiness was delivered through programming and working with high school interns. One of the final programs of the year was a large ALL Careers event at Boulder Public Library and entitled "Connecting Youth to Business and ALL Business to the Environment." In total 52 programs and activities were delivered between May and December to about 2225 participants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87

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: 15.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 5 filed program accomplishments · $101K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.