Marana Bat Haven
Legal name: Marana Bat Haven Ltd
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 873034746
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 5202466465
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Sanctuary, Refuge
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $108,991
- Expenses
- $77,532
- Assets
- $123,055
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Alex Mills (President)
People named in this filing
- Alex Mills (President)
- Jeremiah Miller (Treasurer)
- Sabrina Balabuszko (Secretary)
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
Revitalizing the Sonoran Desert through veganic permaculture and gentle conservation, with a focus on supporting at-risk bat species.
What it reported doing in 2025
Education/Networking: helping others gain knowledge to further our mission, creating and sharing resources. Networking with other knowledgable individuals/orgs to help one another and gain collective insight. This benefited many people online, dozens of local people, and a few orgs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.1%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -198.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0.1% of revenue deployed · 0.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $144 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: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.