Coloradans Resisting Extreme Energy Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474882160
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
Phone
3035307107
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$596,069
Expenses
$593,381
Assets
$5,634
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KAREN DIKE (DIRECTOR)
  • KAYE FISSINGER (DIRECTOR)
  • BRUCE MASON (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. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Coloradans resisting extreme energy development is a social welfare action organization with the purpose to develop and advocate for changes to the Colorado constitution and Colorado revised statutes, legistation, regulations, and government programs to protect Colorado's health, safety, environment, economy, and quality of life from negative impacts generally associated with energy development, exploration, extraction, production, storage, delivery, or consumption. Coloradans resisting extreme energy development works to educate the public and actively promote solutions to environmental issues involving air quality, water quality and usage, soil quality, chemical and radioactive toxicity; public safety issues; land use; costs to local governments; liability issues; the right for communities to pursue effective solutions to environmental issues; and economic stability both for individuals and Colorado as a whole.

What it reported doing in 2016

Two petition ballot initiatives to 1) allow for local control of energy development, exploration, extraction, production, and storage of fossil fuels and 2) create a mandatory setback based on health and safety from occupied structures and public drinking water sources for new oil and gas development.

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 95% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.5%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 53.6%; rating input score 54; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 0.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $593K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $484K reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes grants
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.