Earthrights International Inc
Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.
What it says it does
TO WORK WITH PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD TO PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
- Income
- $10.9 million
- Spending
- $8.9 million
- Spent on programs
- 82%
- Reserves
- 8.3 months of spending
- Largest source of income
- donations and private grants, 98%
- Employees
- 40
- Volunteers
- 10
- Highest pay
- $204,020, deputy exec
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Financial health
Strong: 93 out of 100. Higher than 74% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $10m to $100m).
Reserves
28 of 35Spendable reserves would cover 8.3 months of spending.
Debt
20 of 20It owes 3% of what it owns.
Living within its means
15 of 15Income exceeded spending by 18% of income.
Income trend
15 of 15Income rose 78% on the year before.
Spending floor
15 of 1582% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 4 cents.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Governance
Strong: 100 out of 100. Higher than 39% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $10m to $100m).
Independent board
25 of 2511 of 11 voting board members are independent.
Conflict of interest policy
15 of 15Has a written conflict of interest policy.
Whistleblower policy
8 of 8Has a written whistleblower policy.
Record keeping policy
7 of 7Has a written policy on keeping and destroying records.
Board minutes
5 of 5Keeps minutes of board meetings.
Board sees the tax return
10 of 10Gave the board a copy of this return before filing it.
Pay set independently
5 of 5Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.
Independent check of accounts
15 of 15Its accounts were audited by an independent accountant.
No reported misuse
10 of 10Reports no diversion of assets, excess benefits or loans to insiders.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Impact evidence
Describes programs. Its tax return describes what it does but we have found no measurable results in it.
Programs described in its return (6)
- $1.1 million spent. ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNS: EARTHRIGHTS SEEKS TO RAISE AWARENESS AND BUILD BROAD SUPPORT AMONG LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS AND RESOURCES, ADVOCATE FOR HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS, AND PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AROUND THE WORLD.
- $4.0 million spent. LEGAL: EARTHRIGHTS UNDERTAKES CHARITABLE IMPACT LITIGATION AND RELATED LEGAL ADVOCACY TO DEFEND HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS, ESTABLISH AND CLARIFY LEGAL STANDARDS, AND PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND DETER ABUSES AROUND THE WORLD. CASES ARE CHOSEN FOR THEIR PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE AND BROADER CHARITABLE BENEFIT RATHER THAN TO ADVANCE PRIVATE INTERESTS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH 501(C)(3), THE ORGANIZATION'S LITIGATION FURTHERS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND IS DESIGNED TO PRODUCE SYSTEMIC BENEFITS; ANY RELIEF OBTAINED FOR INDIVIDUAL PARTIES IS INCIDENTAL TO THESE OVERARCHING PUBLIC PURPOSES.
- $928,840 spent. THE EARTHRIGHTS SCHOOLS: EDUCATES PEOPLE OF SOUTHEAST ASIA AND SOUTH AMERICA IN ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS MONITORING AND ADVOCACY TECHNIQUES.
- $1.3 million spent. EARTHRIGHTS USES THE POWER OF LAW AND THE POWER OF PEOPLE IN DEFENSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
- CASE SUMMARIES: EARTHRIGHTS INTERNATIONAL'S CASES SEEK TO PROMOTE SOCIAL WELFARE BY DEFENDING "HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS SECURED BY LAW." THAT IS, OUR PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE REPRESENTATION TO OTHERS IN CASES INVOLVING THE DEFENSE OF HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS, INCLUDING CIVIL, POLITICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS. DOE 1 V. CHIQUITA; DOE 1 V. HILLS; DOE 1 V. FREIDHEIM; DOE 1 V. CHIQUITA; DOE 29 V. FREIDHEIM; DOE 29 V. OLSON; DOE 8 V. CHIQUITA (COUNSEL FOR COLOMBIAN PLAINTIFFS CHALLENGING COMPLICITY OF BANANA COMPANY AND ITS EXECUTIVES IN PARAMILITARY KILLINGS OF PLAINTIFFS' DECEDENTS) DOE V. IFC (COUNSEL FOR HONDURAN FARMERS WHOSE FAMILY MEMBERS WERE MURDERED BY PALM OIL COMPANY FUNDED BY IFC) BOULDER COUNTY V. SUNCOR (COUNSEL FOR CO MUNICIPALITIES SUING OIL COMPANIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGES) CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY V. CALGEM (COUNSEL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATION SUING CALIFORNIA'S STATE OIL AND GAS REGULATOR OVER ITS FAILURE TO APPLY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TO DRILLING PERMITS) MAI V. THE COCA-COLA CO. (COUNSEL FOR CAMBODIAN VICTIMS OF LAND GRABBING BY A THAI SUGAR COMPANY SEEKING DOCUMENTS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1782 RELATING TO COCA-COLA'S INVESTIGATION OF THE LAND-GRABBING INCIDENT) COUNSEL TO TRIBAL NATION BRINGING ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT AGAINST STATE ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS AWARDED BY HUD. INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE DEFESA DO CONSUMIDOR V. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY, LLC (COUNSEL FOR A BRAZILIAN CONSUMER RIGHTS ORGANIZATION SEEKING DISCOVERY FROM MEAD JOHNSON UNDER 28 U.S. 1782 IN SUPPORT OF LITIGATION IN BRAZIL CHALLENGING THE MISLEADING MARKETING OF POWDERED MILK-LIKE BEVERAGES FOR TODDLERS IN PACKAGING AND WITH LABELS EXTREMELY SIMILAR IN DESIGN TO INFANT FORMULA). EL PODER DEL CONSUMIDOR V. THE COCA-COLA COMPANY (COUNSEL FOR A MEXICAN CONSUMER RIGHTS ORGANIZATION SEEKING DISCOVERY FROM COCA-COLA UNDER 28 U.S. 1782 IN SUPPORT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEALTH COMPLAINT FILED IN MEXICO RELATING TO THE DANGERS OF THE CONSUMPTION OF SWEETENED BEVERAGES). ZOZO ET ALL V. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY (COUNSEL FOR 274 VICTIMS OF ALLEGED CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO SEEKING DISCOVERY FROM WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY UNDER 28 U.S. 1782 IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE DRC) EARTHRIGHTS ATTORNEYS ALSO LITIGATE CASES BEFORE THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE COURTS OF THE REPUBLIC OF PERU TO DEFEND HUMAN RIGHTS AND PROTECT THEENVIRONMENT. EARTHRIGHTS ALSO FILES AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS IN U.S., FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL COURTS ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND AS COUNSEL FOR OTHER AMICI.
- EARTHRIGHTS USES THE POWER OF LAW AND THE POWER OF PEOPLE IN DEFENSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Legitimacy checks
Is it registered with the IRS? Passed.
Listed in the IRS master file of tax-exempt organizations as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Has the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status? Passed.
Not on the IRS automatic revocation list.
Source: Automatic revocation of exemption list, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Are donations tax-deductible? Passed.
On the IRS list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.
Source: Publication 78 data: organizations eligible for tax-deductible contributions, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Is it keeping up with its IRS filings? Passed.
Most recent return on file covers the year ending December 2024.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.
Recognized by the IRS since October 1995.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Is it in good standing with state regulators? Passed.
Not on California's list of charities barred from soliciting. Other states are not yet checked.
Source: May Not Operate or Solicit for Charitable Purposes list, California Attorney General, Registry of Charities and Fundraisers, file dated October 21, 2026.
Ratings and checks are our reading of public records, using the published method. They are not a statement about anyone's honesty. If you work for this organization, you can send corrections or results, confirm you want gifts through Veridonate, or ask to be removed from giving.