Anza-borrego Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330334338
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Borrego Springs, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7607670446
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,488,359
- Expenses
- $2,008,971
- Assets
- $14,565,127
- Liabilities
- $452,786
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BILL MCDONALD (Vice President)
- DAVE VAN CLEVE (President)
Highest reported compensation
- BRIANNA FORDEM (Executive Dir.): $163,163 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to protect and preserve the natural landscapes, wildlife habitat and cultural heritage of anza-borrego desert state park and its surrounding region for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.
What it reported doing in 2024
LAND ACQUISITION: Anza-Borrego Foundation conserves lands through outright purchase or donation from willing sellers. Purchased properties are transferred to Anza-Borrego Desert State Park for perpetual stewardship and management. ABF funds the purchases through grants and private donations. Since 2006, the Resources Legacy Fund has provided more than $3 million for land conservation under its Preserving Wild California Program and Wilderness Acquisition Programs. Over 55,000 acres have been preserved, and approximately 14,000 acres of inholdings remain. With funding from grants and dedicated donors, ABF continues the land conservation program to make the Park whole.
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 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -35%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.25; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.