Shasta Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680441184
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redding, CA, USA
Phone
5302417886
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,722,453
Expenses
$1,597,703
Assets
$4,848,241
Liabilities
$172,702

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • NATHAN BELLO (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MELISSA BUCIAK (VICE CHAIR)
  • ALICIA HERRERA (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Conserve the beauty, character, and diversity of significant lands in far northern California. Currently shasta land trust holds conservation easements that permanently protect about 66,000 acres of land.

What it reported doing in 2024

Shasta land trust (slt) works to permanently protect lands in and around shasta county with conservation easements. Vast expanses of habitat for fish, wildlife, and plants are protected as intact ecosystems and thousands of acres of open space will never see development as a result of slt easements. Slt is accredited by the land trust accreditation commission, and continues to focus on completing conservation easements. Slt provides conservation education for the community and provides events where community members learn about environmental achievements and projects in and around shasta county.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.6% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.