Colorado Animal Rescue

Legal name: Colorado Animal Rescue Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841208087
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Glenwood Springs, CO, United States
Phone
970-947-9173
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,066,262
Expenses
$1,183,575
Assets
$1,984,210
Liabilities
$11,638

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wesley Boyd (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Wesley Boyd (Executive Director): $84,110 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Practicing excellence in animal care, education, and advocacy to connect pets to their people

What it reported doing in 2024

Colorado Animal Rescue provides animal sheltering and pet adoption services in the City of Glenwood Springs and Garfield County, Colorado. The shelter operates under the tenets of socially conscious sheltering and provides care for stray pets, bite quarantine cases, owner relinquished animals, and homeless shelter pets from Colorado and neighboring states. In 2024 Colorado Animal Rescue provided service to 853 dogs, cats and exotic pets with 579 adopted into new homes and 80 lost pets reunited with their owners. The shelter provides kennel space for up to 40 dogs, 50 cats, and various others (bunnies, guinea pigs, reptiles, etc.). Every animal that is housed at the shelter receives nutrition, medical and behavior assessments, vaccines, and veterinary care including spay / neuter procedures prior to adoption.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% 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

STRONG - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -11%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $946K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.