Irvine Ranch Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061703160
IRS 990-PF coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990-PF 2014
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
7145084757
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,075,595
Expenses
$1,530,500

Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Overview

Mission

Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

What it reported funding in 2014

The foundation reported 2 grants totaling $400,000. The stated grant purposes included to pay for production, marketing and distribution of the film and film collateral "irvine ranch natural landmarks" virtual helicopter tour. and funds are to be used solely to support preservation, restoration, environmental enhancement, scientific research and monitoring, resource management planning, public education, public recreation programs, and creation of public access infrastructure, including but not limited to trails, staging areas and visitor facilities (collectively, "management") of the protected parks and open space lands located within the boundaries of the historic irvine ranch..

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the foundation's positive operating resources came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The foundation combined direct charitable work with grants to other organizations or people.

The verdict

MIXED - The filing identifies who received its grants and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of spending goes to grants and assets provide a limited cushion relative to annual grants.

Rating breakdown

  • Grant Deployment: NotEnoughData
  • Cost Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency: 100
  • Compliance: 98
  • Endowment Health: 25

Detailed rating inputs

Grant Deployment

  • Grant deployment ratio: Limited

Cost Efficiency

  • Grant expense ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 26; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency

  • Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100

Compliance

  • Part VII-B activity disclosures: 18 of 19 controls in place; rating input score 95
    • Property sale or exchange with a disqualified person: Pass
    • Borrowing from or lending to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Goods, services, or facilities involving a disqualified person: Fail
    • Compensation paid to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Assets transferred to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Payment to a government official: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior self-dealing: Pass
    • Prior-year undistributed income: Pass
    • Excess business holdings: Pass
    • Investments that may jeopardize charitable purposes: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior-year jeopardizing investments: Pass
    • Attempt to influence legislation: Pass
    • Attempt to influence an election: Pass
    • Grants to individuals: Pass
    • Grants to organizations: Pass
    • Spending for a noncharitable purpose: Pass
    • Funds received for a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Premiums paid on a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Prohibited tax-shelter transaction: Pass
  • Filing consistency checks: 9; rating input score 100

Endowment Health

  • Endowment-health comparison: 0.25; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Grants: 100% of grant recipient detail disclosed
  • Trustees: Filed trustees detail
  • Self-dealing: 100% of reviewed questions answered “No”
  • Investments: 25th percentile for endowment coverage
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

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 — Cost Efficiency: Grant expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Endowment Health: Endowment-health comparison scored 25/100.
  • Review — Compliance: Part VII-B activity disclosures: Goods, services, or facilities involving a disqualified person not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.