La Plata Open Space Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841204273
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durango, CO, USA
Phone
9702593415
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$444,154
Expenses
$328,786
Assets
$1,797,897
Liabilities
$21,928

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Zahratka (Executive Director)
  • Adrienne Dorsey (Fmr Executive Director)
  • Rick Borkowski (President Elect)
  • Jenn Clayton (Vice President Treasurer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jennifer Zahratka (Executive Director): $38,366 total reported compensation
  • Adrienne Dorsey (Fmr Executive Director): $25,739 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 organizations primary exempt purpose is to permanently protect, for the benefit of the community and the general public, lands in southwest Colorado that have significant agricultural, wildlife, open space, recreational, and/or historical/archeological resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

Land protection and stewardship: Since incorporating in 1992, LPOSC has accepted donations of conservation easements permanently protecting in excess of 20,709 acres of land with superior conservation values across six counties in southwestern Colorado. In October 2024, LPOSC implemented LANDSCAPE, a secure, cloud-based land conservation software platform designed by former land trust professionals. The system centralizes project management, annual monitoring, exercised rights, issue tracking, funding management, and accreditation reporting thereby enhancing organizational efficiency, long-term accountability, and transparency. This platform strengthens LPOSCs ability to maintain compliance with accrediation requirements and land trust best practice standards. As a certified conservation easement holder, LPOSC is legally obligated to monitor land use and ecological conditions on each property on which it holds a conservation easement to ensure that the conserved land and natural resources are being used in compliance with the terms of the conservation easement. Monitoring helps LPOSC to establish and/or maintain valuable relationships with owners of conserved land, and further helps to foster LPOSCs image in the community as a trusted land steward. This is in addition to work the organization does with numerous private landowners to secure protection of other valuable open spaces, wildlife habitat, recreational areas, and agricultural land in the region.

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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 40%; rating input score 40; 15th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.47; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.7% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $255K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.