Friends of San Diego Wildlife Refuges

Legal name: Friends of San Diego Wildlife Refuges Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330884813
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Imperial Beach, CA, US
Phone
(619) 575-2704
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,308
Expenses
$26,689
Assets
$3,606,129
Liabilities
$3,517,219

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GEORGE DOWDEN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SUE FULLER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MARILYN KEHRY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • GEORGE DOWDEN (PRESIDENT)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support and champion the conservation efforts of San Diego’s wildlife refuges, ensuring these vital habitats thrive for generations to come.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization helps administer and acts as a transfer agent for u.s. Fish and wildlife service programs and California state parks programs for the national wildlife refuges of san diego county. Also, the organization assists in implemention of youth outreach and education programs conducted by u.s. Fish and wildlife service. In addition, the organization assists in the operation of a California state park bookstore at the tijuana river national estuary.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.4%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 51.6%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -25.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 135.12; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.98; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 59.4% of revenue deployed · 51.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.