Pikes Peak Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841339670
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7193891251
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,726,728
Expenses
$11,136,019
Assets
$92,942,575
Liabilities
$12,218,732

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET DOLAN (CEO)
  • NICOLE RIVET (VICE PRESIDENT, COMMUNITY INVESTMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET DOLAN (CEO): $266,119 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE RIVET (VICE PRESIDENT, COMMUNITY INVESTMENT): $220,588 total reported compensation
  • JESSIE MARTINEZ (DIRECTOR, FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $141,277 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inspire a passionate community to forge an enduring legacy now and for future generations. This mission is attained by building a community endowment, helping donors address community needs and providing philanthropic leadership.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community impact - these public-facing programs, funded and/or operated by the community foundation, help us realize our vision of a thriving, resilient, sustainable community with a vibrant quality of life for all. We continued to help fund programs aimed at the redevelopment efforts embodied in the transforming safety initiative. This initiative represents a new vision for public safety, one that prioritizes community development and economic empowerment as tools for crime prevention. By supporting small business loans and community grants in southeast Colorado springs, the initiative empowers residents to identify priorities and implement solutions tailored to their neighborhoods. Through this model, transforming safety fosters safer, more connected communities by investing in people, place-based strategies, and long-term resilience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 37.4%; rating input score 37; 14th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 37.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.35; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $266K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $287K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 38 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 194 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 191 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.