Education Foundation of Eagle Cnty

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841585417
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Edwards, CO, USA
Phone
9703908115
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,394,435
Expenses
$1,112,770
Assets
$499,253
Liabilities
$17,490

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDY RIMEL (PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TESSA KIRCHNER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDY RIMEL (PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $120,015 total reported compensation
  • TESSA KIRCHNER (VICE PRESIDENT): $33,031 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The education foundation of eagle county (efec) is committed to education and students intellectual and emotional growth through equitable access to in-school enrichment programs, mental health supports, and efforts to recognize and retain top teacher talent.

What it reported doing in 2024

Efecs effective teachers program focuses on recognizing and retaining top teacher talent which is critical to student success. Efec provides grants to educators for continuing education, awards outstanding educators on a monthly basis, and hosts recognition events. This fiscal year, at the annual evening of stars ceremony, 29 educators from 10 different schools were awarded scholarships totaling $51,707 to assist them financially to advance their professional knowledge and skills in educational areas and obtain advanced degrees or certificates. On a monthly basis, parents, students, and colleagues are given the opportunity to nominate teachers who have gone above and beyond to positively impact students. This year, 27 teachers from 15 schools received $500 each.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.3%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.8% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $846K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 25 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.