Indigenous Roots & Reparation Fnd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871933610
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Wenatchee, WA, USA
Phone
5096707977
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$258,994
Expenses
$235,881
Assets
$356,371
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARY BIG BULL-LEWIS (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • AMANDA NORTHWIND (CO-CHAIR)
  • PAIGE REYES (CHAIR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The indigenous roots and reparation foundation (irrf) is an indigenous lead nonprofit established in 2021 to preserve history, culture, traditions and language through education and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

Indigenous roots & reparation foundation (irrf) continued to expand its cultural, educational, and community-based programming throughout the year, welcoming tribal members and the broader community onto the p'squosa homeland to learn, gather, and strengthen relationships grounded in traditional teachings. A core focus of irrf's work remains its land back initiative, through which the organization is actively fundraising to purchase land that will serve as a permanent space for ceremony, cultural practice, intergenerational learning, and community wellness. A. Irrf hosted one of its largest programs to date, the indian hemp symposium, in wenatchee, Washington. This first-of-its-kind regional gathering welcomed tribal members and descendants from across indian country, including participants traveling from british columbia, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and throughout Washington state. The symposium featured practitioner-led presentations on traditional plant processing, a dedicated youth day, and a two-day community gathering. Attendees ranged in age from 8 to 75, reflecting irrf's commitment to intergenerational learning and cultural revitalization. B. Through partnership with ncw libraries, irrf hosted multiple indigenous-led book clubs, both in-person and virtual. The wenatchee library and leavenworth library sites provided welcoming spaces for young adults, and elders (ages young adult to 70) to read and discuss works by indigenous authors. These gatherings fostered dialogue, storytelling, and community connection. C. During native american heritage month, irrf partnered with the wenatchee valley museum to host its annual film & panel series featuring the documentary fish war. Irrf elders and staff participated in post-film discussions, providing cultural and historical context. Irrf also partnered with the ruby theater in chelan, Washington, to host an additional screening and panel discussion, where board members engaged community members in dialogue. D. Irrf participated in the earth day fair hosted by sustainable ncw, sharing information about its programs, conducting a community survey, and increasing public awareness about indigenous-led land stewardship and cultural initiatives. E. In continued commitment to honoring elders, irrf carried out its third annual holiday gift-giving program for residents of the colville convalescent center in nespelem, Washington. Staff, board members, and volunteers purchased and delivered gifts based on personalized lists provided by the center. This effort ensures that elders are recognized, celebrated, and supported during the holiday season. Through these programs and partnerships, irrf strengthened community health, advanced cultural revitalization, and increased regional awareness of indigenous issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 77.9%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.9%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 41.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71% of revenue deployed · 77.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $184K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.