Capitol Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911413484
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tumwater, WA, USA
Phone
3609433012
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,687,405
Expenses
$1,688,700
Assets
$30,600,171
Liabilities
$529,352

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARB MORSON (PRESIDENT)
  • TEAGUE POWELL (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID WINTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID WINTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $118,546 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Clt's mission is to conserve and forever care for the lands and waters of the south puget sound and chehalis basin watersheds.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, capitol land trust (clt) updated the 5-yr strategic plan which will drive forward our ongoing commitment to local land conservation and stewardship. We conserved four new properties that contributed to our total of more than 6,700 acres and nearly 20 miles of marine shoreline now permenantly protected across the south puget sound and chehalis basin watersheds. A new entrance was completed at bayshore preserve to ensuree safe and welcoming access to this important natural area allowing more community members to experience the benefits of conservation for themselves. We continued to strengthen community connections through volunteer opportunities, local partnerships, and outreach events, including salmon viewing days, story trails, youth education programs and tranformative guided experiences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.9%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.12; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.9% of revenue deployed · 67.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.