Community Office for Resource Efficiency

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841280543
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Aspen, CO, USA
Phone
9709259775
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,144,130
Expenses
$3,382,399
Assets
$5,076,958
Liabilities
$214,136

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN DOUGHERTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN DOUGHERTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $144,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Core has been helping the roaring fork valley save energy and cut carbon emissions since 1994. The organization promotes the following "core" values: clean air, stable climate, a strong economy, healthy communities, and sustainable energy. Quantifiable data measures energy savings in mmbtus, co2 reduction in metric tons and the economic impact of funding project costs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grant program management: funded from the aspen/pitkin county renewable energy mitigation program (remp). Grant programs include udall new initiative, design assistance, community, and net zero home grants. Core has funded projects for municipal buildings, employee housing, schools, residential properties and commercial entities. Projects include solar pv systems, lighting retrofits, air sealing and insulation, and obtaining leed certification.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 74% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.3%; rating input score 90; 26th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.5; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 14 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.