Redwood Coast Land Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680287719
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Gualala, CA, USA
Phone
7079337551
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,213,471
Expenses
$1,093,583
Assets
$5,322,583
Liabilities
$68,291

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jim Elias (Executive Director -Tax year)
  • Mark Escajeda (President)
  • Jennifer Dumpert (Vice President)
  • Helen Pataki (Executive Director - current)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jim Elias (Executive Director -Tax year): $121,275 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Redwood Coast Land Conservancy preserves, restores, and shares natural landscapes of coastal southern Mendocino and northern Sonoma Counties. (Continued on Schedule O)

What it reported doing in 2025

RCLC protected and stewarded conserved lands while expanding public access to the natural landscapes of the Mendonoma Coast. Program activities included maintaining public trails, coastal accessways, and conservation properties; restoring native habitats; implementing grant-funded stewardship and planning projects; and coordinating volunteers who helped with land management and public access improvements. Major efforts included continued trail development and stewardship at Mill Bend Preserve, ongoing maintenance of the Gualala Bluff Trail, Cooks Beach, and Hearn Gulch, improvements to the historic Gualala Cemetery, planning for Gualala River estuary habitat restoration to benefit native salmonids, and wildfire resilience planning through invasive species removal and vegetation management.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.87; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.4% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $895K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $491K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.