OakTREE Community Interstructure

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392168394
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5105005805
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$268,741
Expenses
$91,526
Assets
$177,522
Liabilities
$307

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Miles (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Crystal Huang (Trsr, Exec Dir): $30,769 total reported compensation
  • Tiffany Sung (Secretary): $21,538 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

OakTREE stands for Oakland Thermal Renewable Energy and Electrification. We build physical and social infrastructure connecting households. Through shared energy, food, and skills, we build self-reliant neighborhoods, localized economies, and resilient community systems.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, OakTREE focused on establishing the organizational foundation necessary to launch its community interstructure programs. The organizations 2025 activities were carried out in furtherance of its exempt purpose by building the operational, financial, and strategic capacity required to deliver community-based infrastructure, workforce development, and food access programs.OakTREEs work during this period centered on preparing to implement its core program areas: integrated renewable energy and infrastructure systems. Activities conducted in 2025 supported the future delivery of these programs and are substantially related to the organizations charitable mission.During 2025, OakTREE undertook a range of activities necessary to enable program launch, including:- Establishing the nonprofit entity and governance structure- Filing for federal and state tax-exempt status- Developing the organizations brand and public-facing education - Building relationships with community partners, funders, and technical experts- Research and landscape analysis for implementation- Conducting grant-writing and fundraising activities- Soliciting and securing charitable contributionsThese activities were essential to building the infrastructure required to design, fund, and implement OakTREEs charitable programs. Each activity was undertaken with the primary purpose of enabling the organization to deliver community-based environmental and economic development programs beginning in 2026.

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 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.8%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.9%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.8% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $73K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.