Structural Engineers Association of Colorado

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841344771
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7022037817
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$339,419
Expenses
$301,099
Assets
$249,825
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JORDAN JARRETT (PRESIDENT)
  • MAX LEHMAN (VICE PRESIDENT/TREASURER)
  • SCOTT HARGROVE (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DAWN MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JORDAN JARRETT (PRESIDENT)
  • MAX LEHMAN (VICE PRESIDENT/TREASURER)
  • JIM FOREMAN (SECRETARY)

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

The overall objective of seac is the advancement of the practice of structural engineering for the benefit of public safety and the structural engineering profession. Continued on schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2025

To advance the practice of structural engineering for the benefit of public safety and the structural engineering profession. The current design wind speeds for buildings in Colorado are incomplete and outdated. Seac, partnering the Colorado department of homeland security and emergency management (dhsem) were awarded a federal emergency management agency building resilient infrastructure and communities (fema bric) grant to cover 75% of the $200,000 cost of a wind study. Seac is responsible for the remaining 25%, which were funded by Colorado firms, seac members, and their networks.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.