Center for Creative Land Recycling

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943302410
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5109183374
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,786,402
Expenses
$2,636,614
Assets
$1,702,253
Liabilities
$232,206

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jean Hamerman (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jean Hamerman (Executive Director): $194,809 total reported compensation
  • Ignacio Dayrit (Technical Lead): $147,565 total reported compensation
  • Claire Weston (Program Director): $132,630 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Center for Creative Land Recycling (CCLR) accelerates economic development by helping communities transform blighted, contaminated, and underutilized properties into engines of opportunity. Through targeted education, strategic partnerships, and hands-on technical assistance, CCLR equips local leaders to overcome redevelopment barriers and unlock sites for investment, job creation, and long-term resilience. From rural towns and tribal lands to urban neighborhoods, CCLR catalyzes land reuse as a pathway to revitalization and inclusive growth.

What it reported doing in 2025

Workshops, webinars & technical assistance: Under an EPA Co-operative Agreement, CCLR provides pro-bono technical assistance, education, and resources to help communities in EPA Regions 9 and 10 navigate brownfield redevelopment, access funding, and achieve equitable land reuse through workshops, expert guidance, and an online resource center. CCLR is also the Brownfields Technical Assistance Provider (BTAP) for California DTSC's Equitable Communities Revitalization Grant (ECRG) and Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) programs.In 2025, CCLR provided technical assistance to 315 unique entities/communities for a total of 526 engagements. This TA included review of 60 EPA MAC grant applications for more than $104 million in requested funding, 41 ARC grant reviews leading to $30.9 million in secured funding, and 7 Brownfield Job Training grant applications reviewed with $3.5 million in funding secured. Additionally, CCLR hosted 17 webinars and events, and presented at 26 other webinars and events reaching 3,029 land reuse practitioners. CCLR shared timely updates on funding, education opportunities and brownfield news with approximately 13,300 land reuse professionals through its monthly Resources for Revitalization newsletter and engaged with an additional 2,130 professionals on LinkedIn. Through funding from the U.S. Bank Foundation, we helped vulnerable California communities bring their visions for parks and green spaces closer to reality by providing tailored technical assistance, guidance, and capacity-building support. Through its general support, the Clif Family Foundation helped strengthen our organization, providing the flexibility needed to advance our mission and deepen our social and environmental impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $110.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 22nd 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: 5.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.4% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $195K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $390K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.