Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 251053485
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- Phone
- 412-288-2777
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Land Resources Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $41,640,928
- Expenses
- $33,374,632
- Assets
- $152,217,016
- Liabilities
- $4,601,874
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
46 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- THOMAS SAUNDERS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS SAUNDERS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $499,208 total reported compensation
- GENEVIEVE MCINTYRE (VP INSTITUTIONAL ADV): $302,355 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH CUTHBERT (VP FINANCE & ADMIN AND CFO): $260,292 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy has been dedicated to protecting and restoring the region’s exceptional natural places since 1932, working in Western Pennsylvania to improve “water, land and life,” including restoring rivers and streams, planting trees and gardens, safeguarding wildlife habitats and natural areas, and preserving Fallingwater.
What it reported doing in 2025
Watershed conservation program: the western Pennsylvania conservancy's watershed conservation program works to improve our region's water quality. Through a number of strategic projects and initiatives - such as streambank restorations, in-stream habitat work, aquatic organism passage improvements and riparian plantings - our watershed conservation program works to protect and restore local rivers and streams. We improve wildlife habitats and increase opportunities for recreation, while working to ensure that our waterways remain healthy and viable for generations to come. Western Pennsylvania conservancy has protected or restored more than 3,000 miles of rivers and streams.
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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 98
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.9%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 37.4%; rating input score 37; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 97%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 19.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.56; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 76.9% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 32 of 33 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $27.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $499K · 46 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.9M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 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: 16 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.