Lincoln Center Support League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742137850
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Fort Collins, CO, USA
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,278
Expenses
$24,336
Assets
$168,661

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Behney (President)
  • Pam Murphy (Vice President)
  • Jack Rogers (Lincoln Center Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Behney (President)
  • Pam Murphy (Vice President)
  • Bruce Staff (Treasurer)

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

To work in partnership with the Fort Collins Lincoln Center to excite enlighten and educate young people through the performing arts.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide a school based program that excites students about reading writing performing and storytelling. Through the Story Bakers group we provide an entertaining high-quality arts education outreach program that helps PSD meet its goal of Literacy for all students. It reaches 2,500 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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 program spending has grown recently. 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.7%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.9%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.93; rating input score 88; 88th 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: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.7% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $16K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.