Border Angels
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010777554
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6194870249
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Travelers' Aid
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $640,301
- Expenses
- $575,564
- Assets
- $799,991
- Liabilities
- $12,122
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Luis Osuna (President)
People named in this filing
- Luis Osuna (President)
- Sheila Solorzano (Treasurer)
- Manuel Ramirez (Member)
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
We advocate for human rights humane immigration reform and social justice. Our efforts aim to reduce fatalities along the US-Mexico border by educating and assisting communities on both sides. Our services include educational programs Water Drops in the desert Day Laborer Outreach the Familias Reunidas Immigration Bond Fund program and Shelter Aid support in Tijuana for migrants and asylum seekers in need.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Shelter Aid program supports the migrant shelters in Tijuana that we partner with. Through this program we provide funding to our trusted shelter directors to cover expenses such as rent utilities construction and groceries. Currently we support 11 shelters in Tijuana that host asylum seekers refugees and deportees.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.6%; rating input score 64
- Program expense ratio: 71%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: $26.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 85.3%; rating input score 85; 40th 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; 64th 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.6% of revenue deployed · 71% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $409K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 43 of 45 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 11 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.