Land Trust of Napa County
Legal name: Napa County Land Trust
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942315096
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Napa, California, USA
- Phone
- 707-252-3270
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Land Resources Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $39,723,786
- Expenses
- $6,896,240
- Assets
- $158,030,310
- Liabilities
- $1,640,893
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DOUGLAS PARKER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DOUGLAS PARKER (CEO): $423,184 total reported compensation
- THERESA ANDREWS (ADMIN DIRECTOR): $184,745 total reported compensation
- BRUCE RUDDICK (FINANCE MANAGER): $170,280 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 Land Trust of Napa County is a community-based nonprofit dedicated to preserving the character of Napa by permanently protecting land. We actively steward the lands we own and foster meaningful connections between people and nature.
What it reported doing in 2024
Land acquisition and protection: in our 48-year history, ltnc has permanently protected more than 95,000 acres of land throughout napa county. We have completed over 270 real estate projects, worked with about 100 property owners, hold over 160 conservation easements and partnered with local, state and federal agencies on the protection and transfer of additional land for public and recreational use. In addition, we own preserves that total more than 22,000 acres in our preserve network, including pristine watersheds, old growth redwood stands and protected wildlife migration corridors. Our primary strategic objective is to increase the pace of land protection, focusing on priority areas chosen for their conservation values including agriculture, biodiversity (flora and fauna), wildlife and watershed protection, as well as preserving the unique character and scenic beauty of napa county.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 19.7%; rating input score 20
- Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $48.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 82.6%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.92; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 19.7% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $423K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $549K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.