Jack L Davies Napa Valley Agricultural Land Preservation Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942843178
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Calistoga, CA, USA
Phone
7079422411
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$168,846
Expenses
$73,392
Assets
$1,190,003
Liabilities
$653

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HUGH DAVIES (President)

People named in this filing

  • Greg Clack (Director)
  • HUGH DAVIES (President)
  • RICH SALVESTRIN (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve, protect and prmomote agricultural land in napa valley

What it reported doing in 2024

To preserve, protect and promote agricultual land in the napa valley

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 24
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.8%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 44.9%; rating input score 45; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 56.5%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.21; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.8% of revenue deployed · 61.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.