Colorado Baton Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421920596
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,819
Expenses
$12,486
Assets
$6,945

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michelle Dawsoon (President)
  • Ashley Swope (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Michelle Dawsoon (President)
  • Ashley Swope (Vice-President)
  • Molly MacEachen (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Our nonprofit organization based in Colorado is dedicated to promoting the unique sport of baton twirling among youth. Through our youth sports programs we provide opportunities for children to develop their skills confidence and teamwork abilities through the art of baton twirling. With a focus on fostering a love for the sport and building a supportive community we strive to inspire young individuals to achieve their full potential both on and off the twirling stage.

What it reported doing in 2025

Organized and hosted the 2025 Colorado State Baton Twirling Championships with athletes from across the state as well as neighboring states participating in solo and team events in preparation for Regional and National Championships. Awards were provided to top performers and Divisions.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.6%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.