Socially Responsible Agriculture Project Inc

What it reported doing in 2025

Water rangers: industrial livestock operations are among the worst water polluters in the u.s. Because these facilities confine so many animals in one place, they generate vast amounts of waste, which is typically stored onsite before being applied untreated to surrounding land. Unfortunately, as a result of weak regulatory policies mismanagement and overapplication of waste is the norm, causing groud and surface waters to be contaminated with pollutants such as nitrogen, phosphorous, organic matter, heavy metals, and harmful pathogens like e. Coli, salmonella, and cryptosporidium. This contaminates drinking water wells, causes fish kills, spawns toxic algal blooms, and renders local waterways unsafe for swimming, fishing, boating, and other recreational uses.in short, rural residents living near industrial livestock operations are on the front lines of a water pollution crisis that threatens their health, environment, and quality of life. Srap's water rangers program is designed to empower these communities to protect their right to clean water and to hold industrial livestock operations accountable for pollution. We train program participants in epa-approved water testing techniques, and provide them with tools to collect and analyze water samples. Participants also learn how to effectively document and report pollution violations to regulators in order to prompt enforcement action. The water rangers program empowers community members to reverse a decades-long trend of handing industrial agriculture a free pass to pollute.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
• Program expense ratio: 71%; rating input score 71
• Fundraising efficiency: $13.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
  • Compensation committee: Pass
  • Independent consultant: Missing
  • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
  • Written employment contract: Missing
  • Compensation survey or study: Pass
  • Board or committee approval: Pass
• 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
  • 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: Pass
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings