Libertas Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455254794
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
Phone
8019010310
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Government and Public Administration

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,958,802
Expenses
$22,653,780
Assets
$12,759,452
Liabilities
$2,806,608

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Chad Goote (VP of Partnersh): $257,400 total reported compensation
  • Connor Boyack (Trustee/Pres.): $247,078 total reported compensation
  • Kenneth Lauher: $215,725 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Libertas Network is a family-facing association of initiatives that change hearts, minds, and laws to create a freer future. We do this through educational materials, events, training, public policy research and education, and more.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our Tuttle Twins initiative and Libertas Institute, our think tank, provides books, curricula, and more to families to teach the ideas of freedom. We also partner with lawmakers and key stakeholders to consider pro-freedom legislative reforms. Through our Action Coalition, we provide families across the country with opportunities to apply and engage with the ideas they've learned to make a difference in their communities.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $19.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.