Western Alliance for Nature

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680515062
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
San Anselmo, CA, USA
Phone
4154469027
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,051
Expenses
$108,186
Assets
$7,413,298
Liabilities
$90,856

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rene Voss (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rene Voss (Executive Director): $20,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting the public use and enjoyment of natural areas; protecting lands to be maintained for wildlife, open space, archaeological preservation and other resource protection purposes; assist in the preservation and restoration of sensitive habitat, open spaces, and scenic areas; manage and protect lands for public access; set up and manage a program to educate the public on the importance of environmental protection and land preservation; and assist and support institutions, organization, associations, trusts, governmental entities and undertakings.

What it reported doing in 2025

Malibu Monarch Project, working to protect monarch habitats and educate the people of Malibu to restore habitats and plant milkweed; and its FireAid Project, working in collaboration with Our Common Heart, to help the communities impacted by the Palisades Fire through self help materials and nature-focused educational mental health resources through partnerships with existing organizations, schools, and targeted online social media campaigns.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $46.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -54.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 68.52; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $100K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.