The Rocky Mountain Consortium for Sports

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813577807
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Edwards, CO, USA
Phone
9706731500
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,601
Expenses
$19,896
Assets
$407
Liabilities
$42,328

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM GUSTAFSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • KIM GUSTAFSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • STEVEN GARDNER (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER)
  • MICHAEL DECKER (CHIEF SCIENTIFIC OFFICER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to perform integrative sports research with young athletes to maintain and promote their athletic performance, health, safety and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2020

The consortium worked with organizations and athletes to measure joint motions, neuromuscular activation, physiological function and external forces to quantify an athlete's performance in a competitive context. These data are used to develop, design and validate new injury risk metrics and training programs. This research and knowledge gained is shared via the organization's website and conventions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 104; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -52.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -53.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.