Colorado Mountain Club Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237319139
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3032793080
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,798,293
Expenses
$183,126
Assets
$4,015,670
Liabilities
$2,984,098

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sherry Richardson (Past President)
  • Janice Heidel (President)
  • Greg Long (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sherry Richardson (Past President)
  • Janice Heidel (President)
  • Linda LaRocque (Treasurer)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To raise, manage and distribute funds to support the stewardship, conservation, education and other programs of the Colorado Mountain Club and similar organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Colorado Mountain Club Foundation is in possession of a few restricted endowments with irrevocable beneficiary interest for the Colorado Mountain Club (CMC). Six grants were awarded to the CMC during fiscal year 2025. 1) Grants of $37,500 were awarded to the CMC in accordance with the endowment restrictions provided by the Anchor Endowment Fund. The funds were given to the CMC for instructor and trip leader support, scholarship support, staff support, and general unrestricted support. 2) A grant of $2,500 was awarded to the CMC in accordance with the endowment restrictions provided by the Eckart Roder Educational Fund. The funds were given to the CMC for education programs. 3) A grant of $1,000 was awarded to the CMC in accordance with the endowment restrictions provided by the Steve Gladbach Endowment. 4) A grant of $600 was awarded to the CMC in accordance with the endowment restrictions provided by the Mary Stockdill Education Fund. 5) A grant of $20,000 was awarded to the CMC in accordance with the endowment restrictions provided by the William D Piety Perpetual Conservation Endowment Fund. 6) A grant of $85,000 was given to the CMC in accordance with the provisions of the Rich McAdams CMC Fund.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7.8%; rating input score 8
  • Program expense ratio: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87%; rating input score 87; 24th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 93.5%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.93; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 51.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7.8% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $169K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.