Los Angeles Waterkeeper

What it reported doing in 2025

The healthy habitats program works to restore the ecological health of the region's rivers, creeks, wetlands, beaches, and coastal waters through fieldwork, community engagement, and advocacy. 2025 was a hard year to work in los angeles - the fires, federal funding freezes, and state budget pressures disrupted timelines across the board - but we made meaningful progress. Through our creeks to coast (c2c) cleanup challenge and river assessment field team (raft), we engaged 730+ volunteers - 63% from disadvantaged communities - in fieldwork across la county beaches, creeks, and rivers, collecting data on 9,525 pieces of litter and removing 1,338 pounds of trash. Raft held 5 field events across 6 sites spanning the full range of the river's condition, from the naturalized arroyo seco upstream site to concrete-lined channels at maywood and the rio hondo confluence, monitoring water quality and continuing our pfas sampling effort (see pollution prevention). We settled our major litigation against la county over the la river master plan, securing the county's commitment to a genuine watershed-wide restoration planning process, and resolved a second legal fight over the pacific place self-storage project in long beach, clearing the way for the rivers and mountains conservancy to move on parcel acquisition in the area. We held three watershed planning workshops in the la river corridor through the safe clean water program to embed flood resilience into how the program funds projects and continued our collaboration with city of la agencies on river flow management.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
• Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
• Fundraising efficiency: $21.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Compensation committee: Missing
  • Independent consultant: Missing
  • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
  • Written employment contract: Missing
  • Compensation survey or study: Pass
  • Board or committee approval: Pass
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd 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: 15.5%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings