Regenerative Organic Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823159905
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
2022584973
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,776,934
Expenses
$1,553,286
Assets
$595,567
Liabilities
$-79,509

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH WHITLOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL ALVAREZ (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $122,068 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH WHITLOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $102,214 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The roa intends to create a path for agricultural producers of food and fiber to introduce and scale the use of regenerative organic practices in their operation in an effort to increase soil health and carbon through soil. Also the roa promotes social justice for fair safe and financially sustainable for farms and farmworkers. To do this the roa has created a written certification framework leveraging many existing standards in the areas of soil health animal welfare and social fairness. As owner of the regenerative organic certification the roa will constantly review best practices in these three areas and revise the certification as necessary

What it reported doing in 2024

The roa has created training and educational materials for farmers and ranchers to identify and integrate the regenerative practices most suitable to their operation. The roa also provides training and eductional materials to certification bodies that oversee audits of farms. The roa developed all of the certifier tools for conducting audits and review. In addition to support producers and certifiers the roa engages in consumer outreach to educate consumers and the general public on the imporance of using regenerative agriculture practices to help imporve our planets health. By increasing consumer knowledge consumers will be able to encouirage farmers to shift to using regenerative practices by seeking goods that are created with regenerative organic ingredients. The roa has presented at numerous conferences and tradeshows to begin the education program. The roa successfully achieved registration status for its certification trademark.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.5%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 52.1%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $103.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.5% of revenue deployed · 52.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $146K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.