Vermont Land Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030264836
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Montpelier, VT, USA
Phone
8022235234
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,570,203
Expenses
$18,656,172
Assets
$64,850,972
Liabilities
$8,325,153

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRACY ZSCHAU (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRACY ZSCHAU (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $143,354 total reported compensation
  • ABBY WHITE (VP FOR ENGAGEMENT): $133,961 total reported compensation
  • TYLER MILLER (VP FOR LAND ACTIVATION): $123,560 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Rooted in Vermont since 1977, the Vermont land trust unites land and lives for the enduring benefit of people and the place we share. We help people protect, care for, and connect to land. This includes the farms, forests, natural areas, and community spaces that define us.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conservationthe Vermont land trust is a member-supported land conservation organization that has worked with families, communities, farmers, and forestland owners since 1977 to conserve over 2,000 parcels of land important to vermonters. Vlt has permanently conserved more than 650,000 acres. This land includes more than 1,100 working farms, more than 410,000 acres of productive forestland, and numerous parcels of community lands. Our staff chooses initiatives and weighs investments of resources in our effort to best serve current and future residents and visitors to Vermont. Our accomplishments include: protecting and stewarding farms, forests, community lands, and associated important natural areas. Protecting and stewarding land that contributes to the cultural, economic, and ecological vitality of local communities. Protecting and stewarding land that is accessible to the public, and that is both affordable and available for those who wish to use it. Improving the lives of individuals and families by invigorating farms, launching new businesses, maintaining scenic vistas, providing local food, encouraging recreational opportunities, and fostering a renewed sense of community.

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 99% 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. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 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; 66th 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: 9.3%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.48; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.3% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $16.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 22 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $316K reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.