Naturaland Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237293632
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Greenville, SC, USA
Phone
3523590013
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,682,962
Expenses
$542,943
Assets
$58,195,975
Liabilities
$12,903,283

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Frank Holleman III (President)
  • Bradford Wyche (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mac Stone (Executive Dir.): $155,100 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Performing activities pursuant to the maintenance and preservation of natural areas for the benefit of the public

What it reported doing in 2024

In an effort to accomplish our goals of protecting the vital forests, watersheds, rivers and public spaces of South Carolinas Blue Ridge mountains we work with conservation partners across the state. This fiscal year we acquired additional properties, for which we will either become the long-term stewards and managers of the property, or subject to a conservation easement. When appropriate, the property may be donated to a state or federal agency like SC State Parks, SC Department of Natural Resources, or the Sumter National Forest.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.5%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $355.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 93.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 107.19; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.5% of revenue deployed · 69.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $376K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.