Rancho Los Alamitos Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330083942
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Long Beach, CA, USA
Phone
5624313541
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,712,631
Expenses
$1,955,640
Assets
$13,429,173
Liabilities
$92,610

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAMELA YOUNG LEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAMELA YOUNG LEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $194,537 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW CHAVES (OPERATIONS DIRECTOR): $103,644 total reported compensation
  • ERIN WILSON (DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR): $100,625 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of rancho los alamitos foundation is public education in the broadest possible sense. The foundation uses the historic site, its history and resources to explore the story of the site in relation to the region, state, nation and beyond through the lens of cultural geography - the interaction between culture and environment. The site offers school tours, public tours, lectures, public educational programs and events, and develops educational materials for the long beach unifired school district.

What it reported doing in 2023

The foundation preserves, restores and manages the historic site and has responsibliity for developing the educational potential of the landmark site under the public/private cooperative partnership with the owner, the city of long beach. The foundation is open to the public free of charge five days a week in the afternoons, free school tours are offered in the mornings, including children's native american cultural workshops, and seasonal large-scale public educational programs are presented, again free of charge. The tour content explores the evolution of southern California, from native american settlement to contemporary times, using the cultural ecology of the historic site as a microcosm of the larger experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -14.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.87; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 62.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $195K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.