National Federation of the Blind of Colorado

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
846107081
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Littleton, CO, USA
Phone
3037781130
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Eye Diseases, Blindness and Vision Impairments

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$454,624
Expenses
$293,676
Assets
$189,924
Liabilities
$14,239

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jessica Beecham (President)
  • Julie Deden (First Vice-President)
  • Maureen Nietfeld (Second Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Jessica Beecham (President)
  • Julie Deden (First Vice-President)
  • Maureen Nietfeld (Second 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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Self-help training and support to blind people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program A: Education, Civil Rights, and Self-Organization: Operated community outreach offices to provide information to the public about blindness and how to help blind people and to locate blind persons in need of assistance. Provided assistance to blind people to attend seminars and workshops designed to assist the blind in learning methods and techniques of organizing local groups of blind people for self-help and in learning about library services, rehabilitation services, new technology, aids, devices, and other resources and materials. Developed, produced, or distributed in print, Braille, and/or recorded media materials relating to blindness. Provided information to individuals, employers, governmental agencies, and the general public through written, telephone, personal, and media contacts. Developed and strengthened state and local organizations of the blind (self-help and support groups) and provided legal assistance, encouragement, information, or advocacy assistance to blind persons. Worked to improve services of governmental and private agencies established to give services to the blind through consumer input, technical assistance, and monitoring. It is estimated that educational activities in one way or another impact upon at least one million individuals in this state annually. Such services are available to and benefit all of the blind of this state. Additionally, since improvements for blind persons in this state affect all blind persons in the country, these activities potentially benefit in excess of half a million blind people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.3%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $96.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 35.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.3% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $274K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.