Earn
Legal name: Earth Allies Restoration Network Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 851014131
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Tulsa, OK, USA
- Phone
- 7202722139
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, Specialty
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $254,804
- Expenses
- $91,090
- Assets
- $163,714
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SOPHIE OPPENHEIMER (CEO/PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- NATE MARRS (Secretary)
- COURTNEY CARDIN (Treasurer)
- ALEXIS OPPENHEIMER (Director)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seeks to spread restoration agricultural methods throughout the world by equipping grassroots organizations and individual farmers alike with the knowledge, funding, and organizational capacity to practice and share restoration agricultural methods in their own communities. This Grant is designed to help support organizations who have a passion and mission to restore ecosystems and improve food insecurity in their communities. The Grant consists of 5 years of implementation of a restoration agriculture program built on the principles of Permaculture, a form of agriculture that closely mirrors natural ecosystems. The focus of this grant is to establish a Demonstration Farm site through which an organization can implement Permaculture themselves, improve the ecosystem in their area, host trainings and workshops, and grow their own food. Organizations must have a passion for...
What it reported doing in 2024
Work with partners to transition communities from conventional farming methods to regenerative practice.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 51
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.3%; rating input score 35
- Program expense ratio: 98.9%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 64.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 43.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 35.3% of revenue deployed · 98.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 14 of 16 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.