Western Lands Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911833716
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2064986695
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,561
Expenses
$155,143
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erica Rosenberg (Board President)

People named in this filing

  • Janine Blaeloch (Executive Direc)
  • Rebecca Rundquist (Board Member)
  • Marianne Dugan (Sec/Treasurer)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To conduct research, outreach, education, and advocacy for the reform of federal exchange policy.

What it reported doing in 2016

Scrutinized public land trades, sales, giveaways, and any other attempt to privatize public land, and their impacts on habitat and wildlife, natural resources, land use, and communities. Worked with citizen groups and fellow environmental organizations to disseminate information on public land transactions; provided regulatory and environmental analysis of public land proposals and policies; consulted with land management officials and staff to understand and critique proposals; worked at all levels of government to effect reform and accountability in public land policies and projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -836.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.8% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $148K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.