Earth Sangha Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541868546
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Annandale, VA, USA
Phone
7033333022
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Buddhism

Reported finances

Revenue
$787,845
Expenses
$713,551
Assets
$1,077,573
Liabilities
$6,635

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Madeline Bright (Exec Director): $82,515 total reported compensation
  • Lisa Bright (Director Emertia): $37,425 total reported compensation
  • Christopher Bright (Director Emerita): $13,020 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Conservation, Ecological Restoration, and helping people develop healthier connections to the lands and waters around them.

What it reported doing in 2025

Non-Buffer Forest: Ecological restoration of public lands that include forest not buffering riparian areas. This work includes the removal of invasive species and replanting of native species by Earth Sangha staff and volunteers. Our main worksite is Mason District Park in Annandale, Virginia where we are working to restore the oak/hickory canopy, but we also support the restoration efforts of the Fairfax County Park Authoritys Invasive Management Area program and small-scale restoration efforts by community groups

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.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.9%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 70%; rating input score 70; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.9% of revenue deployed · 56.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $404K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.