Douglas Land Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841076613
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
Phone
3039198538
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,171,070
Expenses
$528,171
Assets
$3,797,253
Liabilities
$43,367

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TODD WARNKE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA SANFORD (EXEC. DIRECT): $107,683 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote land conservation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Conservation issues/assist with easement legal issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% 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.

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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.3%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 48.3%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 54.9%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.19; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.3% of revenue deployed · 48.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $255K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.