Ecosa Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860844175
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7132695881
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,133
Expenses
$22,766
Assets
$10,367

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TONY BROWN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CYNTHIA FISHMAN (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • TONY BROWN (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY ANN COLLEY (VICE PRESIDE)

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

To teach regenerative design and ecological principles that align human aspirations with nature's systems - empowering students to create resilient, responsible solutions through integrated education.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 ecosa institute reinstated its nonprofit status with the IRS. We relocated the school from Arizona to Colorado and established our business residence. We hosted two events to help activate our new location and celebrate our move. And began planning for the first cohort of students in the new space that is anticipated to happen in the fall of 2026.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.3%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.3%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 30; 30th 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: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.3% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $18K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.