Pikes Peak Historical Street Railway Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742271891
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7194759508
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$53,169
Expenses
$27,953
Assets
$4,787,281
Liabilities
$75

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID HLIPPINCOTT (ASSISTANT TREASURER - PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • JOHN KENNEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FLORIA (VICE PRESIDENT - RESTORATION)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID HLIPPINCOTT (ASSISTANT TREASURER - PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • RICK GORDON (DIRECTOR - AT LARGE)
  • MILES TIHANSKY (DIRECTOR - AT LARGE)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve the history and artifacts of the pikes peak region's street railways and provide educational experience in the operation of a historic form of transportation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Operation of museum and refurbish trolley cars to obtain further support and equipment to bring the organization closer to it's goal for implementation of a street railway system in Colorado springs.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 47.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 171.26; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $25K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.