Land Trust of Santa Cruz County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942431856
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Phone
8314296116
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,880,016
Expenses
$19,506,881
Assets
$87,524,969
Liabilities
$1,519,975

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH NEWKIRK (Executive Dir.): $244,343 total reported compensation
  • TERESA MALONE (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $213,997 total reported compensation
  • BRYAN LARGAY (CONSERVATION DIR.): $195,147 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Land trust of santa cruz county (the organization) was incorporated in California as a not-for-profit corporation in 1978. The mission of the organization is to protect, care for, and connect all people to the vibrant natural and working lands that are essential for our community and nature to thrive together for generations to come. Vision the organization sees a future in which the amazing diversity of lands that define and connect its work to the santa cruz county region the wild and working forests, the globally unique wildlife habitats, the coastal landscape, and its rich farming and ranching heritage are cared for and preserved forever.

What it reported doing in 2024

Land stewardship: the organization stewards its 5,500 acres of fee title conservation lands by implementinghabitat protection and restoration projects, and undertakes species monitoring, grazing, forest management, and research. Annual management plans guide the work to support the conservation values of the lands. The organization holds 45 conservation easements protecting 5,100 acres. Using a baseline report as a benchmark, the organization monitors the values of the easements and ensures compliance with the permanent protection goals.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.8%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $279.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 55.5%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.49; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.8% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $244K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $898K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.