Grizzly Ranch Conservancy a Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200271904
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Portola, CA, USA
Phone
5309021271
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,113
Expenses
$34,163
Assets
$150,974

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew D Norris III (President)

People named in this filing

  • Melissa Pennington (Director)
  • Andrew D Norris III (President)
  • JACK BRIDGE (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Grizzly Ranch Conservancy is a philanthropic organization established for the purposes of improving the environment around Grizzly Ranch. The current projects include creek restoration, trails construction and improvement, on site and off site environmental programs and design and construct demonstration alpine gardens.

What it reported doing in 2024

The conservancy is currently protecting, enhancing and maintaining the property around Grizzly Ranch. The conservancy owns and has easements on various environmentally sensitive areas around Grizzly Ranch. The conservancy provides educational and scientific materials and venues for members and the public throughout the year. The conservancy continues to make progress on the creek and habitat restoration projects along Big Grizzly Creek.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.6%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.42; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.6% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.