The Greeley Dream Team Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841070282
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Greeley, CO, USA
Phone
9703486380
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,513,116
Expenses
$1,411,860
Assets
$1,973,122
Liabilities
$49,408

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSH BOND (PRESIDENT)
  • JUANITA MARTINEZ ROCHA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MIRANDA OCHOA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIRANDA OCHOA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $101,153 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 partner with the community to help children succeed in school and prevent student drop-out for students in greeley evans school district 6.

What it reported doing in 2025

Dream team scholars: the scholarship was established 30 years ago by a diverse cross-section of local citizens and community leaders committed to closing achievement gaps and increasing graduation rates. Each year, a minimum of $20,000 is set aside, and seniors who have participated in the greeley dream team program for a minimum of two years are eligible to apply. This scholarship is offered to individuals who demonstrate academic potential, are involved in community and service areas, or have overcome a personal barrier in order to continue their education. Alumni program: the alumni program provides comprehensive support to dream team students for a minimum of the first two years post-high school, focusing on post- secondary education, workforce readiness/support, and overall life skill development. Key activities of the program include: individualized mentoring and support: advisors meet with each student at least four times per year to determine goals and areas of growth for the academic year; access to skill development: advisors facilitate access to critical post- secondary and workforce skill development including accessing financial aid, course choice, internships/apprenticeships, financial literacy, life skill development, etc.; and workforce development: advisors provide career development and advising to increase awareness of job opportunities after college, ensuring job readiness/placement.dream team at platte valley re-7: the dream team is operating with our proven pre-collegiate comprehensive curriculum model and serving students at kersey middle and high school, increasing access to much-needed educational resources in rural weld county. As with all its programs, gdt empowers students from diverse backgrounds to overcome the odds, graduate from high school, and enroll in post-secondary education or trade school. This is only possible because of the long-term support continuum that begins in 6th grade and continues through 12th grade - combining individualized and group-based mentoring services that leverage students' unique strengths, foster confidence, and keep them on a path toward educational success. This program offers rural weld county students access to stem-focused workshops, enhanced career exploration and workforce skills development through a well-defined, proven curriculum. Gdt's long-range intensive support model helps students be the best they can be while successfully navigating and graduating high school, obtaining a post-secondary degree, and becoming workforce-ready, ultimately increasing the economic stability of our county and community. Other: these funds benefit all dream team students and programs of the organization. Specific initiatives include a school supply drive, mentoring and leadership programs, and exposure to new devices/programs/opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 67% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $113.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.7% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.