Sustainable Conservation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943232437
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159770380
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,662,212
Expenses
$7,000,464
Assets
$12,474,923
Liabilities
$1,021,514

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ashley Boren (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ashley Boren (CEO): $316,469 total reported compensation
  • Michael Behrens (Chief Development Officer): $197,076 total reported compensation
  • Erika Lovejoy (Sr Program Dir AcR): $180,976 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different interests to catalyze conservation success. By listening deeply and honoring all perspectives, we build common ground from which to forge a better path forward for our Golden State.

What it reported doing in 2025

California boasts iconic plants and animals, some found nowhere else on the planet, but more than 350 of these species and their habitats are threatened because weve significantly altered the states landscapes. This includes the destruction of 90% of Californias riparian forests and ongoing pollution in a vast majority of waterways. The good news is that all Californians, from private landowners to conservation groups to public agencies, can do a lot to restore these damaged places. We make it easier to restore our vital natural resources in a changing climate by partnering with government, NGOs and other restoration proponents to develop regulatory and policy incentives that accelerate the pace and scale of habitat restoration statewide. Our efforts help revive degraded waterways to boost clean water and habitat, and bring struggling species back from the brink.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 72.3%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 9 of 9 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: 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: 27.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.9% of revenue deployed · 72.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $316K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $157K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.