Arello Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205076923
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
3123004800
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,658
Expenses
$17,636
Assets
$186,979
Liabilities
$1,150

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANNE PETIT (CHAIR)
  • AMBER NUTT (VICE CHAIR)
  • JESSICA HICKOK (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Arello foundation shall educate the public on subjects useful to the individual and beneficial to the community. Arello foundation's educational and research activities shall be conducted in an objective manner, and shall be presented with a sufficiently full and fair exposition of the pertinent facts as will permit an individual or the public to form an independent opinion or conclusion. The corporation shall present its educational programs through public discussion groups, forums, panels, lectures, and similar activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Arello foundation issued a grant to the Maryland realtors for an educational service project informing consumers of the value of understanding how the real estate industry operates. This project was a video production that was widely distributed and attributed credit to the arello foundation for the grant award. There were no expenses associated with this grant award.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.6; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.