The California Land Conservancy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 770556528
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Laguna Beach, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7143295786
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,643,518
- Expenses
- $33,613
- Assets
- $4,358,798
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Edwin Sauls (Chair/CEO)
People named in this filing
- Edwin Sauls (Chair/CEO)
- Elisabeth Sauls (Secretary/Treas)
- Wayne White (Vice Chairman)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The primary mission of The California Land Conservancy is the preservation, protection, or enhancement of land in its natural, historic, agricultural, forested, or open-space condition or use.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organizations program accomplishments related to other lands include serving as a facilitator and holder of mitigation lands and conservation easements for development projects, including residential, commercial, renewable energy, utilities, etc. Also, the Organization has facilitated the acquisition and donation of private property for the purpose of mitigation and conservation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% 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
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 8
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 96
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.9%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 21
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 98%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 129.68; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.9% of revenue deployed · 21.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.