Pima County Community Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272635994
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Phone
5206030587
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$580,744
Expenses
$1,060,249
Assets
$8,328,926
Liabilities
$390,121

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Crystal Atwell (Vice President)
  • Joshua Taylor (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Maggie Amando-Tellez (Executive Dir.): $87,550 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pima county land trust's mission is to create a permanent inventory of affordable homes in our community. Additionally, the land trust created homeownership opportunities for low income individuals by removing the land cost from the purchase price and leasing the lot to the homeowner.

What it reported doing in 2024

The land trust's mission is the permanent stewardship of land for the community benefit and the perpetual preservation of the affordability of housing on the land. Pcclt makes it possible for low-to-moderate income households to own homes on land leased from pcclt through long term 99 year, inheritable ground lease. Pcclt's stewardship program provides outreach including one-on-one counseling, referrals to supportive services and empowerment workshops which include a financial literacy component and contacts that provide long-term social and economic support to participants. Pcclt leases single family homes and apartments to low-to-moderate income families.

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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $51.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -82.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.86; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $893K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.