Highland Santa Barbara Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453962008
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2142766300
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,087,722
Expenses
$494,007
Assets
$88,214,035
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES DONDERO (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACQUELINE CARRERRA (DIRECTOR, SECY/TREASURER): $541,304 total reported compensation
  • TODD YUBA (DIRECTOR): $354,465 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See 4a below

What it reported doing in 2024

The highland santa barbara foundation is organized and operated exclusively as a supporting organization within the meaning of section 509(a)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended (the "code"), to support and benefit the santa barbara foundation ("sbf"), a California nonprofit corporation. Sbf is exempt from federal income taxation under section 501(a) of the code as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the code and a public charity described in section 509(a)(1) of the code.the organization received its funding as one of three charitable remainder beneficiaries of a charitable remainder trust created by james dondero, which terminated on november 30, 2011. The charitable purpose of the organization's supported organization, which was founded in 1928, is to enrich the lives of the people of santa barbara county through philanthropy. Sbf supports diverse charitable causes in the community, such as education, the arts, mental health, and numerous other charitable areas in which its donors are interested. In 2024, sbf awarded over 2,000 grants totaling over $40 million. The organization supports and benefits sbf by making grants directly to sbf in support of its charitable purposes. In addition, upon the direction and on behalf of sbf, the organization may make grants to such other public charities that sbf wishes to benefit in furtherance of sbf's exempt purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Revenue comfortably covers expenses and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 35
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 50.6%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 54.6%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 178.57; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23% of revenue deployed · 50.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $250K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $541K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.