EarthON Foundation

Legal name: Earthon Foundation USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920535548
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Forest Hills, NY, USA
Phone
+1 (914) 618-8726
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$536,442
Expenses
$120,782
Assets
$567,316
Liabilities
$6,400

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STELLINA JOLLY (DIRECTOR)
  • RUSTAM SENGUPTA (CHAIRMAN)
  • FRED HENRY (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

To identify, support, and scale enterprises that create livelihoods, restore ecosystems, and transform local economies, while building the ecosystem around them by bringing together funders, governments, academic institutions, and networks.

What it reported doing in 2024

Earthon foundation USA incurred program support and services expenses to develop knowledge tools and digital solutions that strengthen renewable energy adoption and support grassroots climate leaders. The foundation developed a solar training audio-visual toolkit, including a trainer module, a trainee curriculum and two instructional videos covering solar energy fundamentals, installation, and maintenance. In addition, podcasts on energy transition and innovation were produced to promote renewable energy awareness and learning. These resources were shared with solar training centres across india, benefiting over 1,000 trainees, and are also being made available digitally to extend their reach. The foundation also developed a prototype of ekta.ai, a multilingual conversational ai tool designed to support grassroots climate leaders by improving access to knowledge related to clean energy, sustainability, and community-led climate solutions. Together, these activities contributed to workforce skill development, improved access to clean energy knowledge, and strengthened local capacity for sustainable and inclusive energy transitions.

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 93% 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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 66.7%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 77.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.7; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 91.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 118.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 11 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 16% of revenue deployed · 66.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $81K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 16/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.