Sightline Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521833599
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2064471880
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,469,635
- Expenses
- $3,538,905
- Assets
- $8,135,675
- Liabilities
- $520,424
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Alan Durning (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Alan Durning (Executive Director): $236,122 total reported compensation
- Meaghan Tracy (Managing Director): $211,401 total reported compensation
- Anna Fahey (Principal Director of Strategy): $204,128 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Independent, nonpartisan research, analysis, and policy solutions to advance strong communities, a green economy, and a healthy environment.
What it reported doing in 2025
Since 1993, Sightline Institute has been the independent, nonpartisan think tank for Cascadia from the Rockies to the Pacific and from Alaska to Oregon. We provide citizens and decision-makers with the research, policy analysis, and practical tools they need to advance strong communities, a green economy, and a healthy environment. In 2025, our work contributed to the region's transition to clean energy, abundant housing options, and stronger democratic participation across the Northwest. Highlights included supporting a first-of-its-kind agreement to pilot neighborhood-scale electrification in Oregon, playing a key role in passing the nation's strongest statewide parking reform in Washington, and working alongside partners to defend Alaska's ranked choice voting system from repeal. We shared these solutions widely through in-depth research, media commentary, and public events, and worked to assemble the multi-partisan coalitions often needed to turn policy ideas into reality. All of our research is freely available under our open-use policy. Our core program areas are Climate and Energy, Housing and Cities, and Democracy and Elections.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.5%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 20.8%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.3; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 35.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59.5% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $236K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.