Balboa Park Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452072081
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6193311920
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$163,505
Expenses
$158,317
Assets
$24,785
Liabilities
$19,597

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Conservancy raises funds, develops public-private partnerships and collaborates with Balboa Park stakeholders to implement capital projects and address deferred maintenance needs in Balboa Park.

What it reported doing in 2012

The Conservancy conducted a series of Collaborative Conversation Workshops with over sixty Balboa Park stakeholders in the second quarter of 2013 in order to develop public-private partnerships and collaboration with Balboa Park stakeholders. Stakeholders provided valuable and specific advice regarding The Conservancys criteria for prioritizing projects, the opportunities for impact and collaboration and the ongoing development of The Conservancy and the Park community as a whole.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 16th 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: 7 of 7 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: 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: 3.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.