Freedom Revived
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 850915654
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
- Location
- Westminster, CO, USA
- Phone
- 7204048050
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $636,012
- Expenses
- $612,213
- Assets
- $94,248
- Liabilities
- $11,805
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jordan Long (President/ CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Jordan Long (President/ CEO): $90,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Freedom Revived is here to bring a proactive approach to serving those who serve us. We provide support and encouragement through a variety of services that revitalize mind, body, and spirit to our Frontline.
What it reported doing in 2024
We provide free full day and half day outdoor activities for first responders. Fly Fishing, Golf outings, Archery and Range time, and Scenic Side by Side trips are just a few examples. We also provide a variety of different relationship building activities for spouses and families of first responders. Nonclinical outdoor activities and peer support to create a safe space for open conversation, 2-3 day retreats with psychoeducation built into the curriculum, linkages to resource partners, family support in many ways including providing benevolence to responder families enduring loss and financial crisis. We also serve many police and fire agencies after critical incidents by providing crew building activities and a variety of other services to our responder community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.8%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 3.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.8% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $488K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.