Tri-valley Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943216468
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Livermore, CA, USA
Phone
9254498706
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Farmland Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,914,929
Expenses
$1,247,978
Assets
$27,508,111
Liabilities
$300,623

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER TAGGART (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER TAGGART (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $141,068 total reported compensation
  • VICTORIA TICHY (COMMUNICATION AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER): $106,828 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote economically sustainable vineyards and orchards, an increase permanently protected, biologically diverse open spaces.

What it reported doing in 2024

Engaging the next generation - 4th grade students in livermore and pleasanton participated in the "discovery: youth in nature program". This youth education program is offered as a blended learning experience of in-classroom curriculum and a half-day guided hike hosted at holdener park, a tvc preserved open space and trail. Tvc's website also offers at-home learning activities. The youth-in-nature program content encourages students to explore topics of healthy natural resources, types of open space, and wildlife habitat protection, specific to the tri-valley. The program objective is to educate and cultivate the open space stewards and leaders of tomorrow.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.7%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 34.8%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.04; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.7% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $987K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.