Friends of the Lafayette Library Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841310502
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Lafayette, CO, USA
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,207
Expenses
$41,672
Assets
$125,473

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Virginia McKay (President)
  • Hiram Wolgemuth (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Virginia McKay (President)
  • Gregory Sherman (Treasurer)
  • Margaret Carrier (Board Member)

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

Friends of the Lafayette Library is a non-profit organization that funds various library programs resources and equipment for the Lafayette Colorado Public Library. Examples of some of the programs that rely exclusively on Friends support are: Makerspace a 3-D printing laboratory where members of the public can schedule time to come to the library and make use of 3-D printing equipment and software; BookPage a printed hard copy recommendation guide for readers highlighting the best new books across all genres as chosen by their editors; Aunt Flo a program providing free feminine hygiene products in all library restrooms; Books On The Bus a program providing free books for children K-3. The books are too damaged to sell and are donated to the Boulder County school buses for kids riding the bus to read and or take home.

What it reported doing in 2025

Makerspace. A 3-D printing laboratory where members of the public can schedule time to come to the library and make use of 3-D printing equipment and software.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 73.8%; rating input score 74

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.01; rating input score 74; 74th 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: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.2% of revenue deployed · 73.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.