Agricultural Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930400250
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Corvallis, OR, USA
Phone
5417373228
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,714,308
Expenses
$10,350,259
Assets
$37,701,257
Liabilities
$6,846,339

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSH KVIDT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MIKE MACNAB (PRESIDENT)
  • RALPH FISHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LANCE LYON (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSH KVIDT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $193,715 total reported compensation
  • YING WANG (CONTROLLER): $119,234 total reported compensation
  • CHARLENE WILKINSON (APPOINTED SECRETARY): $115,782 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to encourage facilitate support and engage in scientific investigation and research experimentation and to advance educational and training activities related to agriculture and natural resources throughout the state of Oregon and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

The agricultural research foundation arf established in 1934 plays a vital role in promoting research in various agricultural and related fields to benefit oregons agricultural and natural resource industries. As the custodian of donated research funds including private and public donations as well as contract funds from commodity commissions and producer associations arf facilitates research conducted at Oregon state university osu facilities in corvallis and throughout the state. Additionally arf collaborates on cooperative projects with university scientists in other states. In the fiscal year 2024-25 arf reported a total income of 9.1 million from gifts and contracts alongside approximately 1.25 million in investment earnings. A significant portion of the funds approximately 9.7 million was allocated towards research activities including support through arfs competitive grant program. This program plays a crucial role in providing small grants to both new and established scientists aiding in the launch of new research programs and activities. The research initiatives supported by arf in 2024-25 encompassed a wide range of topics from studying plastic ingestion by marine animals to addressing winter squash storage rots and establishing fertilizer guidelines for hazelnut trees. The diverse array of research projects included studies on crop production plant breeding livestock management environmental toxins and energy production reflecting the foundations commitment to advancing knowledge in key areas impacting the agricultural industry. Founded on the vision of fostering a strong collaborative partnership between osu and oregons agricultural and natural resource sectors arf continues to uphold this vision by actively working towards enhancing these partnerships each year. Through its dedication to supporting innovative research and fostering connections between academia and industry arf remains a cornerstone in advancing agricultural knowledge and practices for the benefit of oregons agricultural community and beyond.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 65% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.1%; rating input score 96; 26th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.64; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 45 of 46 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.