Colorado Youth Matter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742511487
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3032258870
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Birth Defects, Genetic Diseases Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,247,198
Expenses
$1,224,487
Assets
$335,979
Liabilities
$113,190

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA OLCESE (EXECUTIVE DI): $71,646 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA MILLER (EXECUTIVE DI): $10,727 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Colorado youth matter actively engages Colorado communities to promote the healthy sexual development of all young people.

What it reported doing in 2016

Colorado youth matter (cym), formerly the Colorado organization on adolescent pregnancy, parenting and prevention, began in 1984 as an all- volunteer organization providing networking and training opportunities for educators working to support teen parents. Cym incorporated as a non-profit corporation in 1988 and established itself as the only statewide organization dedicated to a comprehensive approach to youth sexual heath through systems-level change, with state agencies, school districts and Colorado communities. Cym works to strengthen leadership and advance the movement for youth sexual health through training, capacity-building, advocacy, research and networking opportunities to youth-serving professionals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.