Mesa County Jail Ministry

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300845521
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Grand Junction, CO, USA
Phone
9702417149
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Inmate Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,336
Expenses
$69,231
Assets
$46,560
Liabilities
$1,682

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Barney (President)
  • Paul Von Guerard (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Andrew Barney (President)
  • Carl Boydstun (Treasurer)
  • Paul Von Guerard (Vice-President)

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

The purpose of Mesa County Jail Ministry is to provide bible studies, counseling and Christian education to Mesa County Colorado jail inmates and staff

What it reported doing in 2025

Ministered to over 500 inmates and staff and also overseenmany religious programs and over 100 religiousvolunteers at a large county detention facility.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $64K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.