Chestor House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840887844
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Westminster, CO, USA
Phone
3036641050
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Autism

Reported finances

Revenue
$92,123
Expenses
$194,587
Assets
$3,569,328
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHIL BARTON (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF ILSEMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROD FELZIEN (Director): $5,802 total reported compensation
  • PHIL BARTON (PRESIDENT): $2,238 total reported compensation
  • JEFF ILSEMAN (VICE PRESIDENT): $1,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Promoting the general welfare of autistic persons and others with cognitive disabilities by providing funding for charitable services.

What it reported doing in 2025

The purpose of the chestor house guardianship program is to provide the charitable services of identifying, matching, approving, and contracting with professional guardians when participating Colorado judicial district courts deem that a court appointed guardian is needed.chestor house only provides these charitable services when the person who needs a court appointed guardian has cognitive disabilities, has no one to act as guardian, and has no available source of funds.every effort is made to make the program cost effective, and each case is reviewed at the end of one year and subsequently.chestor house is currently approved by and works with 3 Colorado judicial districts (jd17, jd19, & jd20) thereby serving those with cognitive disabilities in adams, broomfield, weld and boulder counties.chestor house is working to serve more people with cognitive disabilities by expanding into more Colorado judicial districts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -111.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.34; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -27.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -21% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $146K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.