Center for Agricultural Resilience

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874025804
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Bluffton, GA, USA
Phone
7705303961
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food, Agriculture, and Nutrition N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$470,046
Expenses
$144,127
Assets
$864,217
Liabilities
$486,334

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAYLOR GOSMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JENNIFER HARRIS (DIRECTOR)
  • TAYLOR GOSMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • JOS PREZ (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cfar's mission is to educate individuals and organizations on the environmental, economic, and social benefits of building resilient animal, plant, and human ecosystems that can nourish our communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

In collaboration with white oak pastures in bluffton, Georgia, cfar hosted solar grazing and regenerative agriculture workshops, provided hands-on farm training, and expanded partnerships with universities, agricultural organizations, and veteran programs. These initiatives trained hundreds of participants and increased adoption of regenerative methods that restore soil health and strengthen rural communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 28.4%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14,589.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 69.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 28.4% of revenue deployed · 92.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $134K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.