Denver Fire Fighters Burn Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841098212
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7202265586
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$269,247
Expenses
$205,054
Assets
$788,941
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Trent Headley (President)
  • Patrick Hynes (Vice President)
  • Kelli Gilchrist (Vice President)
  • Lacy Burke (Vice President)
  • Conner Clegg (Vice President)
  • Sarah Jones (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Moyara Rediker (Director)
  • Trent Headley (President)
  • Patrick Hynes (Vice President)

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

The dffcf is a fire fighter-based, non-profit organization established to educate families, emergency workers, & medical community about burn prevention & care while providing burn survivors & their families support & recovery assistance. The dffcf also supports firefighters and their families when they experience medical or financial hardship and supports the widows and orphans of deceased denver firefighters.

What it reported doing in 2024

IAFF Foundation: Supporting IAFF programs including assistance following natural disasters, funding of behavioral health programs, scholarships for the children of fire fighters who have died in the line of duty, support for families of fallen members throughout the annual Fallen Fire Fighter Memorial service, and the best care possible for members who suffer burn injuries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.4%; rating input score 81; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.85; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54% of revenue deployed · 60.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.