The Access Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943131165
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
Phone
3035456772
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,504,708
Expenses
$3,167,020
Assets
$4,896,762
Liabilities
$368,687

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHELMA JUN (PRESIDENT)
  • HILARY HARRIS (PRESIDENT EM)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIK MURDOCK (INTERIM EXEC): $155,716 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER THORNE (EXECUTIVE DI): $145,219 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the access fund is to lead and inspire the climbing community toward sustainable access and conservation of the climbing environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Land acquisition and protection - the access fund climbing conservation loan program is the first-ever revolving loan program that provides local climbing organizations and other agencies with the funds and expertise to act quickly to save threatened climbing areas. In special circumstances, access fund will hold endangered property on behalf of the climbing community. As of 06/30/25, access fund owned one property in fee; leased two properties; held conservation easements on ten properties; and managed three properties under contract. Education the access fund advances climber education through the lens of minimum impact behaviors so that climbers become better stewards of the nations climbing resources. Through the climber steward program, social media outreach, print publications, and the vertical times newsletter, the organization provides up-to-date news on policy, area reports, events, action alerts, grants, and more. Risk management and landowner support the access fund works with private and public landowners on tools and strategies to mitigate both real and perceived risks of climbinggiving them the confidence and protections they need to open their land to public access. The access fund works to strengthen state recreational use statutes and helps landowners implement waiver systems and other types of access agreements to mitigate risks.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 26%; rating input score 26; 13th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.6%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.