The Desert Tortoise Conservancy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900838402
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Palm Springs, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5035226611
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Preservation, Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,909
- Expenses
- $17,400
- Assets
- $115,207
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- RON BERGER (DIRECTOR)
- ANDREA BERGER (DIRECTOR)
- CAROL BERGER (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To increase public awareness of the plight of the desert tortoise (gopherus agassizii) to ensure the desert tortoise does not become extinct and to ensure that sustainable populations survive in the wild; to provide care for the desert tortoises that cannot survive in the wild; to acquire, restore and protect the habitat of the desert tortoise; and to carry on other charitable and educational activities associated with this goal as allowed by law.
What it reported doing in 2025
To increase public awareness of the plight of the desert tortoise to ensure the desert tortoise does not become extinct and to ensure that sustainable populations survive in the wild.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -254.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.62; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.