Putah Creek Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680228865
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Winters, CA, USA
Phone
5307959000
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$562,409
Expenses
$538,329
Assets
$509,585
Liabilities
$13,201

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PHIL STEVENS (Exec Director): $95,256 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 inspire love of Putah Creek, its wildlife and natural habitats, and promote their protection and restoration through advocacy, education, and community-based stewardship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community Stewardship: organizes and hosts weekly volunteer events to restore and care for the wild areas along Putah Creek. In FY 2024-25, PCC hosted 504 volunteers who collectively contributed 1,332 hours of labor, planted over 2,000 native plants, removed six truckloads of invasive weeds, spread 6.25 truckloads of mulch to suppress weeds and retain water, and collected over 1,440 pounds of trash. OneCreek: introduces adults ages 18 and up to the science and practice of habitat restoration through an innovative eight-week paid internship. OneCreek interns assist with restoration projects led by a variety of local organizations including resource conservation districts, water agencies, and city open space programs. In FY 2024-25, OneCreek trained 42 interns and worked with 11 different partner organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th 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: 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $392K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.