The Bureau of Land Management Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
881553091
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
7712131628
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,082,083
Expenses
$3,570,515
Assets
$8,773,848
Liabilities
$746,121

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • I LING THOMPSON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • I LING THOMPSON (CEO): $333,327 total reported compensation
  • DAVID ZHANG (CHIEF DEV. OFFICER (FROM 05/24)): $152,443 total reported compensation
  • PAULA NEIRA (TREAS, VP FINANCE & OPS (FROM 10/24)): $55,256 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation for america's public lands is a non-profit organization chartered by congress. Its mission is to support the bureau of land management (blm) by encouraging, accepting and managing private donations to benefit blm programs and services. As the official charitable partner of the blm, the foundation serves as a convener, partner and fundraiser catalyst to help ensure the health and sustainability of america's public lands and waters today, and for the future.

What it reported doing in 2024

As the official charitable partner of the bureau of land management (blm), the foundationfor america's public lands serves as a convener, partner, and fundraising catalyst to help ensure the health and sustainability of america's public lands and waters today, and for the future.founded in 2022, we work hand-in-hand with the blm, local communities, and partners to increase support for public lands and waters and inspire more people to connect with the outdoors. Each unique and truly special scenic river, wilderness area, monument, historic trail, conservation area, and working land holds a story of its own.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.8%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 40.1%; rating input score 40
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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; 72nd 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: 29.7%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.46; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 97.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 51% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 83.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.8% of revenue deployed · 40.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $333K · 12 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $678K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.