US-Mexico Border Philanthropy Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262946180
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6198141388
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,566,678
Expenses
$2,508,747
Assets
$732,653
Liabilities
$271,519

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Carey (Executive Director)
  • Joaquin Luken (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew Carey (Executive Director): $150,000 total reported compensation
  • Joaquin Luken (Executive Director): $115,016 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 US-Mexico Border Philanthropy Partnership strengthens and grows community philianthropy in the US-Mexico border region.

What it reported doing in 2024

BPP was formed in 2008 and launched an education program to gather disseminate accurate data on border issues to imform critical decision-making with both internal and external constituent groups. We also organize region-wide events to spotlight needs and solutions, as well as bring together public and private entities with border responsibilities, adding our vision and leadership to summon effective action. This education program includes the creation of marketing and educational materials.

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 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 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: 2.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 14 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $200K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.