Charity Navigator's ratings previously did not consider Leadership & Adaptability, Culture & Community, or Impact & Measurement. The historic rating mainly reflects a version of today’s Accountability and Finance score. More information on our previous rating methodologies can be found on our rating methodology page.
Rating histories are available for a growing number of rated organizations. Check back later to see if this organization has a rating history!
This beacon provides an assessment of a charity's financial health (financial efficiency, sustainability, and trustworthiness) and its commitment to governance practices and policies.
Majority Independent Board Members - 100% independent members
10 out of 10 points
Industry professionals strongly recommend an independent governing body to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters. We check to see that a majority of board members are identified as independent on their tax form.
Source: IRS Form 990
Independent Board Size - 15 independent members
10 out of 10 points
Industry professionals strongly recommend an independent governing body to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters. For most organizations, we check to see if the organization has at least three independent board members. For large, donor-funded organizations, we check to see if the organization has at least five independent board members
Source: IRS Form 990
Material Diversion of Assets - None
10 out of 10 points
A diversion of assets — any unauthorized conversion or use of the organization's assets other than for the organization's authorized purposes, including but not limited to embezzlement or theft — also can seriously call into question a charity's financial integrity. We review the charity's most recent IRS Form 990 to see if the charity has reported any diversion of assets.
Source: IRS Form 990
Tax Form Disclosures and Policies
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Website Listed on Tax Form - Listed
3 out of 3 points
Charity Navigator looks for a website on the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency metric.
Nonprofits act in the public trust and reporting publicly on activities is an important component.
Source: IRS Form 990
Conflict of Interest Policy - Listed
7 out of 7 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a conflict of interest policy on the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy protects the organization and by extension those it serves, when it is considering entering into a transaction that may benefit the private interest of an officer, director and/or key employee of the organization.
Source: IRS Form 990
Whistleblower Policy - Listed
7 out of 7 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a whistleblower policy per the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy outlines procedures for handling employee complaints, as well as a confidential way for employees to report financial or other types of mismanagement.
Source: IRS Form 990
Document Retention and Destruction - Listed
7 out of 7 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a document retention and destruction policy per the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy establishes guidelines for the handling, backing up, archiving and destruction of documents. These guidelines foster good record keeping procedures that promote data integrity.
Source: IRS Form 990
Documents Board Meeting Minutes - Yes
3 out of 3 points
Charity Navigator looks to confirm on the IRS Form 990 that the organization has this process in place as an accountability and transparency measure.
An official record of the events that take place during a board meeting ensures that a contemporaneous document exists for future reference.
Source: IRS Form 990
Website Disclosures
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Tax Form Posted on Nonprofit's Website as stated on Form 990 - Missing
0 out of 3 points
For almost all charities, we check the charity's IRS Form 990 to see if it discloses that the Form 990 is available on the charity's website. As with the audited financial statement, donors need easy access to this financial report to help determine if the organization is managing its financial resources well.
Source: IRS Form 990
Financial Metrics
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Liabilities to Assets: Ratio - 0.00%
15 out of 15 points
The Liabilities to Assets Ratio is determined by Total Liabilities divided by Total Assets (most recent IRS Form 990). This ratio is an indicator of an organization's solvency and/or long-term sustainability.
Source: IRS Form 990
Program Expense: Ratio - 89.20%
25 out of 25 points
The Program Expense Ratio is determined by Program Expenses divided by Total Expense (average of most recent three IRS Forms 990). This measure reflects the percent of its total expenses a charity spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver.
Source: IRS Form 990
Additional Information
Total Revenue and Expenses - Data Available
This chart displays the trend of revenue and expenses over the past several years for this organization, as reported on their IRS Form 990.
Salary of Key Persons - Data Available
Presented here are up to five of this organization's highest compensated employees. This compensation data includes salary, cash bonuses, and expense accounts and is displayed exactly how it is reported to the IRS. The amounts do not include nontaxable benefits, deferred compensation, or other amounts not reported on Form W-2. In some cases, these amounts may include compensation from related organizations. Read the IRS policies for compensation reporting
Cecilia Ramirez, Director
$26,908
Adam Darragh, Director
$0
Glenda Gray, Director
$0
Anne M Hallum, Chairperson
$0
Rebecca Hallum, Director
$0
Source: IRS Form 990 (page 7), filing year 2022
IRS Published Data (Business Master File) - Data Available
Organization which receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or the general public 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (BMF foundation code: 15)
Affiliation:
Independent - the organization is an independent organization or an independent auxiliary (i.e., not affiliated with a National, Regional, or Geographic grouping of organizations). (BMF affiliation code: 3)
Data Sources (IRS Forms 990) - Data Available
The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage accountability and finance data from it to form Encompass ratings. Click here to search for this organization's Forms 990 on the IRS website (if any are available). Simply enter the organization's name (Alliance for International Reforestation Inc.) or EIN (593062311) in the 'Search Term' field.
Impact & Measurement
Score
100
This beacon estimates the actual impact a charity has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.
$204,459 total costs / 1,389,007 years of personal carbon emissions offset = roughly $0.15 offsets one year of personal carbon emissions for a typical American. [2021 USD]
Program Context
Reforestation in central Guatemala: This program plants trees to reforest or afforest land in order to sequester carbon to avert greenhouse gas emissions.
Data Time Period
1/1/20 to 12/31/20
Benchmark for Scoring
Impact scores of reforestation and afforestation programs are based on a comparison to the social cost of carbon. The social cost of carbon represents the cost to society of emitting a metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. If carbon was efficiently priced in a carbon market, our benchmark of $3888 is approximately what the typical American would pay each year to maintain their current level of emissions, in 2021 USD. Nonprofits score 100 points if they can offset the carbon emissions of a typical American for less than $2916 in 2021 USD. They score 80 points if they can do so for between $2916 (i.e. 75% of the benchmark) and $4860 (i.e. 125% of the benchmark). If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the benchmark for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 65. This program may offset a typical American's personal carbon emissions for less than 75% of the social cost of those emissions.
Methodology
This impact score was determined through the Afforestation & Reforestation methodology which is fully detailed in the Charity Navigator Guide to Ratings. Analysis conducted in 2023 by Charity Navigator using data submitted by the nonprofit, theory and evidence from scientific research studies, and public datasets.
Data Source
The nonprofit submitted data on how many hectares of land it reforested or afforested, as well as general information on the type of land on which the nonprofit planted.
Measurement
Unscored
0% of Impact & Measurement score
Culture & Community
Score
91
This beacon provides an assessment of the organization's culture and connectedness to the community it serves.
Does your organization collect feedback (i.e., perceptions, opinions, concerns) from the people meant to ultimately benefit from your mission?
Yes
Feedback Usage
100 out of 100 points
How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?
To inform the development of new programs/projects
To strengthen relationships with the people we serve
To understand client needs and how we can help them achieve their desired outcomes
Practices
100 out of 100 points
Which of the following feedback practices does your organization routinely carry out?
We take steps to get feedback from marginalized or under-represented people
We take steps to ensure people feel comfortable being honest with us
We engage the people who provide feedback in looking for ways we can improve in response
We tell the people who gave us feedback how we acted on their feedback
Challenges
100 out of 100 points
What challenges does your organization face in collecting feedback from the people you serve?
We don’t have the right technology to collect and aggregate feedback efficiently
This organization collects feedback in other ways
Equity Strategies™
87 out of 100 points
67% of Culture & Community score
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Equity Strategies™ - Number of Data, Policies & Processes
87 out of 100 points
This organization's score of 87 is a passing score. The organization reported that it is implementing 8 Equity Practices.
The Equity Strategies™ checklist, developed by Equity in the Center™, consists of data, policies & processess that promote racial equity in operations and programs. The Equity Strategies™ were developed by Equity In The Center®, and collected in partnership with Candid.
Equity Data (4/7)
We review compensation data across the organization (and by staff levels) to identify disparities by race.
We ask team members to identify racial disparities in their programs and/or portfolios.
We analyze disaggregated data and root causes of race disparities that impact the organization/'s programs, portfolios, and the populations served.
We disaggregate data to adjust programming goals to keep pace with changing needs of the communities we support.
We employ non-traditional ways of gathering feedback on programs and trainings, which may include interviews, roundtables, and external reviews with/by community stakeholders.
We disaggregate data by demographics, including race, in every policy and program measured
We have long-term strategic plans and measurable goals for creating a culture such that one’s race identity has no influence on how they fare within the organization.
Equity Policies & Processes (4/7)
We use a vetting process to identify vendors and partners that share our commitment to race equity.
We have a promotion process that anticipates and mitigates implicit and explicit biases about people of color serving in leadership positions.
We seek individuals from various race backgrounds for board and executive director/CEO positions within our organization.
We have community representation at the board level, either on the board itself or through a community advisory board.
We help senior leadership understand how to be inclusive leaders with learning approaches that emphasize reflection, iteration, and adaptability.
We measure and then disaggregate job satisfaction and retention data by race, function, level, and/or team.
We engage everyone, from the board to staff levels of the organization, in race equity work and ensure that individuals understand their roles in creating culture such that one’s race identity has no influence on how they fare within the organization.
This beacon provides an assessment of the organization's leadership capacity, strategic thinking and planning, and ability to innovate or respond to changes in constituent demand/need or other relevant social and economic conditions to achieve the organization's mission.
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization's mission.
RURAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING, REFORESTATION
Vision Statement
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization's vision.
Our vision is to improve human and environmental health in Central America as we work to restore the
Strategic Goals
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking and goal setting through sharing their most important strategic goals.
Goal One: Our three-year strategic plan is to complete construction of a second Training Center in Quiche, Guatemala while maintaining the first Center to serve the new communities asking for AIR's training.
Goal Two: Also in strategic plan is to increase number of professional Maya technicians, who each serve 8 to 10 schools and communities. Also, train new technicians in northern Nicaragua.
Goal Three: Add a Development Director and engage the Board of Directors in order to increase AIR's financial capacity--but continue with at least 90% of funding going to the field.
Leadership
30 out of 30 points
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Investment in Leadership Development
The nonprofit provides evidence of investment in leadership development.
In 2021 AIR conducted an internal restructuring designed specifically to provide more leadership development roles for our technical staff. We separated the area served by AIR into two regions, with one of the regions now managed by a senior technician. This allows our executive director develop and mentor someone to help her with management of our organization as we grow. We also and added subject-area specialist roles (e.g., coffee-focused agroforestry). These roles allow our staff to become subject matter experts in key aspects of our program. They are then responsible for teaching other staff members and leading initiatives such as those for coffee-based agroforestry and avocado plantations.
External Focus on Mobilizing Mission
The nonprofit provides evidence of leadership through focusing externally and mobilizing resources for the mission.
Social Promotion
Civic Engagement
Adaptability
30 out of 30 points
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
Adaptability Statement
30 out of 30 points
The nonprofit has an opportunity to tell the story of how the organization adapted to tremendous external changes in the last year.
AIR adapted our work over the last year in response to COVID to remain safe and to be flexible to meet the immediate needs of each community where we serve. Our core work of regenerative forestry and reforestation education/implementation was able to continue, albeit with periodic interruptions, since it occurred outdoors in rural areas in small groups. Adaptations for this work included implementing health and safety measures among our staff to reduce the risk of COVID spread within and between communities (e.g., masks, cleaning protocols, vaccinations). In one instance we also paused our operations for a short time to protect our farmer partners when an AIR staff became infected with COVID and other staff members were exposed. During outbreaks in the communities where we work, our staff switched roles from technical training to emergency response. Our support was adjusted day to day based on the specific needs identified in each community. For example, we provided food kits to families when markets closed or when they needed to isolate/quarantine, and used our trucks to provide transportation to clinics for the seriously ill.
We made the decision to halt our volunteer efforts in 2021. This primarily affected the construction of vented fuel-efficient cook stoves. Bringing international visitors to work with a disadvantaged rural population without good access to healthcare was deemed too great a risk.