The Regen Coalition Trade Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934246650
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
Phone
3173731132
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Boards of Trade

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,549
Expenses
$4,839
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLE KRULL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KYLE KRULL (PRESIDENT)
  • HAYLEY PAINTER (TREASURER)
  • DANIELA JENSEN (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Regen Coalition exists to support its member companies. Its mission is to nurture the regenerative CPG community by collectively identifying its shared challenges and catalyzing its collaborative solutions. The organization's members include food and beverage brands that pay annual dues to support the organization's work. Members gain access to the services and community of the organization.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Regen Coalition recognizes that regenerative brands share problems that often hold back their businesses, individually and collectively. The Coalition also recognizes that many brands want to work together to solve these problems but often lack bandwidth, budget and infrastructure. Regen Coalition aggregates needs and resources to collectively address problems that transcend individual brands.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -162.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.