Regrow Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850975418
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
6507013826
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,787
Expenses
$56,118
Assets
$18,099
Liabilities
$43

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EVAN RAPOPORT (CEO DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • EVAN RAPOPORT (CEO DIRECTOR)
  • JOSHUA YELLIN (SECRETARY DIRECTOR)
  • LAWRENCE RAPOPORT (CFO)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To restore the environment and the economy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research shows that one of the most effective ways to address climate change, biodiversity loss, and economic hardship is to educate and support women and girls. Our work primarily focuses on supporting hundreds of girls in rural Kenya whove been rescued from sexual and gender-based violence. We provide money to rescue shelters that care for these girls and help them go through school. Most of our funding goes to food and critical infrastructure, such as buildings, building building boreholes to get clean water, and gardens / greenhouses to to grow food. These centers are in very poor parts of Kenya with high biodiversity, so our work also helps raise awareness about the importance of protecting nature for a thriving economy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.8%; rating input score 88; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -22.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -110.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -119.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -99% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $52K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.