Rocky Mountain Butterfly Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841155029
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Westminster, CO, USA
Phone
3034695441
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,279,543
Expenses
$7,914,958
Assets
$10,445,063
Liabilities
$1,632,337

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATHALIE BROCHU - CHAIR (AND INTERIM CEO (THROUGH APRIL 2025))
  • RYAN WELCH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • RYAN WELCH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $162,443 total reported compensation
  • ERIN MACGUIRE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $147,197 total reported compensation
  • MARY ANN COLLEY (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $141,068 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 foster an appreciation of invertebrates by educating the public about the need to protect and care for threatened habitats globally, while conducting research for solutions in invertebrate conservation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education: butterfly pavilion typically reaches over 115,000 lifelong learners, including over 60,000 students annually through field trips, outreach, and virtual programs. Butterfly pavilion has become a regional leader in hands-on science and ecology education for pre-k through 12 learners. We bring school curriculum alive through play, project-based learning, and in-depth scientific explorations. In addition, we cultivate a culture of conservation through afterschool enrichment programs, family nature clubs, youth day camps, adult interpretive programs, and volunteer community science projects. Our educational programs are designed to build awareness and appreciation for invertebrates and to help develop a sound, scientific understanding of their role in our ecosystems.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 48
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th 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: 4.4%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.