Pinelands Preservation Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521641512
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Southampton, NJ, USA
Phone
6098598860
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,596,805
Expenses
$3,658,140
Assets
$9,945,807
Liabilities
$538,849

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACLYN M RHOADS (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CARLETON MONTGOMERY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARLETON MONTGOMERY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $156,694 total reported compensation
  • JACLYN M RHOADS (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $112,448 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To preserve the pine barrens ecosystem, promote wide public engagement in their preservation, and advance acquisition of land and development rights by private and public conservation agencies.in addition to this work, the alliance has two initiatives: pinelands adventures, an outdoor recreation program aimed at fostering public understanding of and devotion to the pinelands and rancocas creek farm a sustainable, chemical-free farm connected to our mission to protect the pinelands.we are dedicated to furthering justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in our staff and our work. Everyone should have access to recreation, clean air and water and the scenic beauty the pinelands provides.

What it reported doing in 2024

Constituency building, science & stewardship: includes activities to educate the public and government officials about the beauty and value of, as well as the threats to, the pinelands, and about the work of ppa to preserve the natural and cultural resources of the region. These efforts include, by way of example, ppa's newsletter, slide presentations and talks, making films and other educational materials, field trips and tours.

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.

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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.72; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 80.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 26 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.