The Colorado Education Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261597530
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3037366477
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,874,077
Expenses
$7,907,734
Assets
$7,923,989
Liabilities
$607,944

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA F HOLMES (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA F HOLMES (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $267,862 total reported compensation
  • JEREMY S O'GRADY (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $191,973 total reported compensation
  • SAMANTHA OLSON (VP OF STRATEGY): $180,624 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.cei's mission is to champion, empower, and ignite Colorado leaders to deliver on the promise of public education to develop thriving young people and flourishing communities. Cei's long-term vision is that all young people in Colorado exit k-12 education boldly taking their next steps toward hopeful, equitable, and prosperous futures.

What it reported doing in 2024

Social emotional development cei partners with schools and districts across Colorado to enhance educators and schools' capacity to create a culture and climate that meets students' social, emotional, and academic needs. We support the development of strong social-emotional ecosystems by focusing on four core areas: creating learning environments that are physically and emotionally safe, trust-filled, relationship-rich, and dedicated to building social and emotional skills; building multi-tiered supports and stronger connections with community resources to ensure that students and staff with behavioral health needs receive the necessary services; engaging youth to take an active role in driving climate and culture change within their schools while strengthening partnerships with teachers and staff to bring about this transformation; and actively involving families and community members in the design and implementation of an inclusive school culture.

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 93% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: 90.4%; rating input score 90; 26th 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: 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: -0.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $6.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $268K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $322K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 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: 33 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 26 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.