Impact Development Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841505466
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Loveland, CO, USA
- Phone
- (970) 494-2021
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46,471,972
- Expenses
- $14,991,383
- Assets
- $194,003,825
- Liabilities
- $114,966,127
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BECKY CHRISTOFFERSEN (PRESIDENT)
- JAVONNI BUTLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- MARK OCONNOR (PAST PRESIDENT)
- MEGAN FERGUSON (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MEGAN FERGUSON (CEO): $321,814 total reported compensation
- ERICA MADISON (CHIEF LENDING OFFICER (THRU 11/21/25)): $223,091 total reported compensation
- MARCIA MYERS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $198,111 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We've made it our mission to assist these communities by providing loans to non-profits, families, and developers.
What it reported doing in 2025
In may 2021, the fund established impact development builders, llc ("idb") as a Colorado limited liability company. The purpose of idb is to provide, on a fee or other basis, construction, repair, maintenance, and similar construction services to clients and non-profit partners in the affordable housing community, including aquiring and rehabilitation of distressed housing units and construction of new development for sale to low and moderate income residents.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $142.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 67.7%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.94; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $322K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $823K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.