Pepperwood Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010817571
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Phone
7075919310
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,597,591
Expenses
$4,180,427
Assets
$36,047,083
Liabilities
$320,277

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET BOEGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET BOEGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $157,422 total reported compensation
  • ZACHARY WINTER (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $133,087 total reported compensation
  • SLOANE CHINN (MANAGER OF PHILANTHROPIC GIVING): $121,639 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pepperwood foundation's mission is to inspire conservation through science.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research, citizen science, and conservation: pepperwood is a permanently protected 3,200 acre nature preserve located in sonoma county. The preserve serves as a field site for cutting edge university research and leads ground-based habitat and watershed restoration programs in concert with dedicated citizen scientists. We systematically monitor weather, water, and the health of local plant and animal populations and pursue onsite restoration aimed at increasing the health and resilience of the many species that call this region home. These applied research and conservation projects serve as learning models for land and water managers throughout the bay area and beyond. In 2016, our science programs were honored by inclusion in a new white house climate adaptation initiative and by a national science foundation biological field station award.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.5%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.62; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.5% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 17 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $312K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.