Four Corners Office for Resource Eff
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262091859
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
- Location
- Durango, CO, USA
- Phone
- 9702591916
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $874,363
- Expenses
- $770,260
- Assets
- $279,691
- Liabilities
- $2,217
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jenny Hill (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Jenny Hill (Executive Director): $72,979 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Four Corners Office for Resource Efficiency (4CORE) serves Southwest Colorado by promoting resource conservation, energy efficiency and renewable energy through education and programs that strengthen the local economy and foster a healthy, sustainable environment.
What it reported doing in 2025
4COREs Clean Transportation Program advances zero-emission transportation and electric vehicle charging infrastructure across Southwest Colorado. The program prioritizes disproportionately impacted communities and income-qualified residents those who stand to benefit most from cleaner air, lower fuel costs, and expanded mobility access. Through education, outreach, planning support, and project implementation, 4CORE works alongside residents, businesses, local governments, and rural communities to reduce emissions, improve air quality, and ensure that affordable, sustainable transportation options are within reach for everyone. In 2025, 4CORE supported Community Needs Assessment work in three rural communities by conducting targeted outreach, distributing surveys, and gathering mobility preference data to surface local transportation barriers, resident priorities, and pathways to funding.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 96
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th 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: 11.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $603K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.