Challenge Aspen

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841315910
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Snowmass Village, CO, USA
Phone
9709230578
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,159,953
Expenses
$2,903,118
Assets
$7,790,378
Liabilities
$468,458

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACK KENNEDY (PRESIDENT)
  • LINDSAY CAGLEY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDSAY CAGLEY (CEO): $214,020 total reported compensation
  • JENNI PETERSEN (CFO): $133,665 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Challenge aspen is dedicated to impacting lives by presenting meaningful recreational, educational and cultural experiences to individuals faced with cognitive or physical challenges.

What it reported doing in 2024

Challenge aspen's rec division (recreation, education, culture) serves individuals living with cognitive and/or physical disabilities, offering life changing wellness opportunities in the roaring fork valley. These programs are designed to develop skills, foster courage and boost self-esteem, broadening life and healthy opportunities for all ages. Challenge aspen fosters relationships with community partners who contribute in kind services to directly impact and lower the cost of programs. . Www.challengeaspen.org/programs/adaptive-recreation/

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.3%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.3% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.