Buffalo Bayou Partnership

Legal name: Buffalo Bayou Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760183954
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, Texas, US
Phone
713.752.0314
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,042,524
Expenses
$21,467,912
Assets
$127,123,621
Liabilities
$18,538,754

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

47 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Anne M Olson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Anne M Olson (President): $253,106 total reported compensation
  • Ian Rosenberg (Sr VP Capital Projects, Planning): $191,598 total reported compensation
  • Leigh McBurnett (VP Development): $166,196 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Creating and stewarding a vibrant network of welcoming public spaces.

What it reported doing in 2024

See Schedule OBuffalo Bayou Park - A strong public-private partnership including the Kinder Foundation, Buffalo Bayou Partnership (BBP), the City of Houston, and Harris County Flood Control District carried out an ambitious $58 million restoration project for the stretch of bayou from Shepherd Drive to Sabine Street. The project involved flood management, eco-restoration, new hike and bike trails, and an array of park amenities. The park improvements were substantially completed in 2015, and BBP transferred ownership to the City. BBP maintains and operates the 160-acre Buffalo Bayou Park with funding from the Downtown Redevelopment Authority TIRZ #3. It is also responsible for maintaining the hike and bike trails and green spaces along the waterway from Sabine to Austin streets with funding from Houston First Corporation and Houston Parks Board. To assist with ongoing maintenance and conservation efforts, BBP relies on thousands of volunteers and community service workers each year who remove weeds and invasive species, plant wildflowers, pick up trash, and remove silt from the trails after heavy rains.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.8%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $51.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 30.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.92; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 68.8% of revenue deployed · 94.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 40 of 40 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $20.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 47 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $14.5M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.