Bolsa Chica Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330516059
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Huntington Beach, CA, USA
Phone
7148461001
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$353,234
Expenses
$382,604
Assets
$1,231,861
Liabilities
$4,012

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL KALMICK (President)
  • ROBERTA ARMSTRONG (Vice President)
  • KIMBERLY KOLPIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • KIMBERLY CARR (Director)
  • DANIEL KALMICK (President)
  • CATHY WARD (Director)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The acquisition, preservation, and restoration of all of bolsa chica and the education of the public to its natural wonders and cultural significance.

What it reported doing in 2025

Native habitat restoration activities; staffing, planning, purchase of plants, tools, equipment, supplies and irrigation for large-scale habitat restoration on the bolsa chica mesa. The on-going project is in cooperation with the California dept of fish and wildlife, who manage the reserve, and utilizes the efforts of the many community volunteers in the project.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.22; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.4% of revenue deployed · 54% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $207K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.