My Future Pathways

Legal name: My Future Pathways Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834345901
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Avon, CO, USA
Phone
9703063123
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,527,031
Expenses
$1,400,676
Assets
$1,118,720
Liabilities
$10,539

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOBY SEAY (PRESIDENT)
  • BRATZO HORRUITINER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRATZO HORRUITINER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $152,749 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

My Future Pathways’ mission is to provide a helping hand to empower and enhance the lives of young Latino community members and their families. We inspire youth to ignite their grit and passion to achieve the ultimate goals of graduation, employability and leadership for a fulfilling and productive life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide a helping hand to enhance and enrich the lives of first-generation eagle county youth, leading to positive pathways.teach strong values, self-discipline, grit, and integrity, with an emphasis on developing social and emotional skills.foster community collaboration and parental involvement.respond proactively where mfp can make a difference and as needs are identified by eagle valley behavioral health and eagle county schools.create future leaders in the vail valley community.provide collegiate scholarship to support positive pathways.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.2%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.1% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.