Community Land Trust in the Southern Berkshires Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042709835
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Great Barrington, MA, USA
Phone
4135284472
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,159
Expenses
$136,840
Assets
$334,518
Liabilities
$1,755

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH DOWNIE (INTERIM CO-PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC AULICINO (INTERIM CO-PRESIDENT)
  • ROB PUTNAM (CO-VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FULOP (CO-VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SARAH DOWNIE (INTERIM CO-PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC AULICINO (INTERIM CO-PRESIDENT)
  • ROB PUTNAM (CO-VICE-PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The community land trust in southern berkshires (cltsb) is the title-holding corporation for the berkshire community land trust (bclt) with a shared board of trustees. Land acquired by the bclt is transferred to the cltsb to lease to year-round residents of the berkshires.

What it reported doing in 2025

The community land trust holds community-owned land for homes, farms, and businesses to ensure permanent access, control, affordability and stewarship.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.2%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 25

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -100.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.2% of revenue deployed · 25.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.