Bullying Recovery Resource Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820693560
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3039911397
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$130,356
Expenses
$175,822
Assets
$120,341
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DRU AHLBORG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DRU AHLBORG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $70,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bullying recovery resource center defends bullied children and helps rebuild lives

What it reported doing in 2025

Bullying recovery resource center hosted its 1st annual take a swing at bullying topgolf event and its 2nd annual upstander 5k event. Brrc worked with the impact denver program to actively reach out to organizations actively serving dei communities. The advocacy program trained 3 new volunteer advocates and assisted over 100 new families. Under our community program with the help of volunteers we partnered with 38 new businesses and organizations across Colorado and sent out over 1200 brochures. Under our education program we provided materials and education to many individual families and provided education classes to organizations specializing in the neurodiverse, bipoc and lgbtq communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.4%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 12.9%; rating input score 13
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -34.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.4% of revenue deployed · 12.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • 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 17/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.