Well-being Center of Colorado

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260856142
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Englewood, CO, USA
Phone
3036481920
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$153,810
Expenses
$264,629
Assets
$45,379
Liabilities
$98,040

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY NICHOLAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NANCY MARKHAM BUGBEE (CLINICAL DIRECTOR/COFOUNDER): $144,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our unique and vital mission is to strengthen those who serve others: helping professionals and family caregivers in order to encourage caring, wellness, and quality of life for members of the community as a whole.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, we piloted and tested a foundational formation and training program designed to upgrade the work of select hospice volunteers to provide a high level of patient and family care in the hospice environment. We pursued a strategic alliance with a for-profit national hospice company to test the program in one location. We also pursued a strategic alliance with the spiritual care association designed to have them host and advertise the program materials and provide credentialing for graduates.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

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: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -72%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.16; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 54.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 2 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $204K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.