Independence Pass Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841133782
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Aspen, CO, USA
Phone
9702749690
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$498,572
Expenses
$314,029
Assets
$1,191,095
Liabilities
$816

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM MCCURDY (PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTEN HENRY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KARIN TEAGUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARIN TEAGUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $128,451 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 mission of the independence pass foundation is to restore and protect the ecological, historical, and aesthetic integrity of the independence pass corridor and to encourage stewardship, safety and appreciation of the pass.

What it reported doing in 2025

As a volunteer and partner-driven non-profit, staff spends a great deal of time organizing, training, and working with volunteers, including schools, youth groups, recovery centers, inmates, community members, and other non-profit and government agency personnel and volunteers. These partners and volunteers help us accomplish many times the restoration work we could otherwise accomplish with just one full-time staff member.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 37%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.79; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $128K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.