E3 Ranch Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822269889
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Scott, KS, USA
Phone
6202033224
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,289,298
Expenses
$2,463,971
Assets
$2,114,213
Liabilities
$40,261

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENT TONEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENT TONEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $144,750 total reported compensation
  • BENJAMIN GATROST (FIELD ANALYST): $126,000 total reported compensation
  • JERAD MYERS (DATA SPECIALIST): $116,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To put god's love into action, and like him, never stop pursuing those in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

E3 ranch foundation's global response program provides rapid, mission-aligned assistance to individuals and communities facing crisis around the world. The foundation mobilizes with trusted partners to deliver aid such as food, shelter, medical support, evacuation assistance, and other urgent relief, while also supporting other organizations engaged in crisis response. Efforts focus on meeting immediate needs with safety, accountability, and alignment to the foundation's values. Overall, the program exists to bring timely, compassionate support to vulnerable people experiencing conflict, disaster, or humanitarian emergency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.1%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84%; rating input score 84; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.1%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.1% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.