Yolo Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680160105
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Woodland, CA, USA
Phone
5306621110
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,123,912
Expenses
$728,951
Assets
$10,522,589
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN CURREY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KATHY WARD (Vice President)
  • MARY-ANN WARMERDAM (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN CURREY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $120,244 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the yolo land trust is to protect agricultural and habitat land in yolo county.

What it reported doing in 2024

In continuing to assist landowners in conserving prime agricultural land in yolo county, yolo land trust acquired four agricultural conservation easements totaling 80 acres during the current year. The organization once again held its annual event, day in the country, which serves to promote public awareness of the importance of agriculture and the need to preserve it by spotlighting various areas of farming and wildlife habitat. In addition to holding special events to educate the public, yolo land trust works year-round to monitor and inspect the easements under its care. The organization also leases out the elkhorn farm to active farming as part of its efforts to preserve prime agricultural land.

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 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.

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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 62.6%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.44; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38% of revenue deployed · 62.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $457K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 38/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.