Congaree Land Trust
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 570937485
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Columbia, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8039880000
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Land Resources Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $789,331
- Expenses
- $547,798
- Assets
- $4,197,252
- Liabilities
- $104,069
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TRIP CHAVIS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- STUART J WHITE (EXECUTIVE DI): $94,500 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 congaree land trust was established to promote voluntary conservation of scenic lands, open spaces, farms, forests, natural areas and significant habitats in central South Carolina.
What it reported doing in 2024
The congaree land trust worked to conserve and preserve conservation easements totaling over 99,000 acres of natural and scenic lands, farms, waterways, forests, and natural areas in central South Carolina, by assisting landowners with voluntary conservation. The land trust works with private landowners to protect land primarily through establishing, creating, and monitoring perpetual conservation easements - recorded legal agreements that protect the land's natural and scenic features by restricting its use and development. The land trust holds the conservation easement and accepts responsibility for monitoring compliance with the terms of the easement and for defending the easement should the terms be threatened or violated. The congaree land trust also provides education, training, conferences, events, and literature to its individual and corporate members and the general public to encourage conservation and appreciation of the natural and scenic areas in its area.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 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: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.9%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 50.3%; rating input score 50
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 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: 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 30.6%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.66; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 49.9% of revenue deployed · 50.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $276K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $94K · 20 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.