Ecoagriculture International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202349392
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakton, VA, USA
Phone
2026435605
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,363,308
Expenses
$2,500,271
Assets
$1,857,503
Liabilities
$337,623

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARA J SCHERR (BOARD MEMBER/PRES/CEO (TO 12/16/24))
  • GRAHAM WOOD FROM 121624 (BOARD MEMBER, PRES/CEO INTERIM)

Highest reported compensation

  • SETH A SHAMES (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $143,985 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL KELLER (DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS): $131,938 total reported compensation
  • BEMMY GRANADOS (DIRECTOR OF INNOVATION IN LANDSCAPE): $129,823 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ecoagriculture partners enables landscape partnerships to engage in long-term collaboration, access finance, and influence local, national, and global policy to advance integrated landscape management.

What it reported doing in 2024

Innovations in landscape management, finance & policy (ilm): the ilm program advanced collaborative learning by developing cutting-edge tools, curricula, and guides. A product testing workshop in kenya engaged 30 participants from eight landscape initiatives and 16restoration programs, laying the groundwork for a 2024 conference expected to host 200 representatives from kenya and neighboring countries. Additionally, the launch of a program supported by a belgium-based nonprofit provided 10 tailored online training sessions supported by original learning materials, furthering ilm practices globally.the finance & policy team strengthened the field of integrated landscape finance by building the 1000l finance solutions design team and co-facilitating the 1000l landscape finance accelerator pilot program. This pilot, focusing on four landscapes, developed and tested a landscape finance assessment tool and capacity-building modules, while generating valuable insights. Direct support was provided for landscape finance strategies in sierra de tapalpa, mexico, and san martin, peru.to foster a global community of practice, the team co-convened an influential landscape finance dialogue series targeting financiers and landscape partnerships. Published reports on landscape finance and national biodiversity strategies further bolstered the field, as didcontributions to a technical guide on urban-rural linkages. Ecoag works closely with local partner organizations in kenya, india, vietname, peru, colombia and mexico as well as with international programs that support multiple landscape partnerships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $64.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 30th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.2% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.