Anishinaabe Agriculture Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823639038
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Osage, MN, USA
Phone
2185736432
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$475,312
Expenses
$936,138
Assets
$265,055
Liabilities
$97,131

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY LEE CHILTON (FORMER INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JERRY LEE CHILTON (FORMER INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $64,726 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Anishinabe agricultural institute is working to restore foodways, rematriate seeds, and make a new economy; one based on local food, energy, and fiber.

What it reported doing in 2024

The anishinaabe agriculture institute has three focus areas: community food, research, and youth education. Indakiingimin means the very land to which we belong is where we live and where the generations ahead will also live. Indakiingimin is our work.community foods: we produce foods for the village of pine point and the people of the white earth reservation, while building capacity for the village and our area to have food security. Our work is primarily with heritage crops of corn, beans, squash, and potatoes, with expansions into laying hens. Our work in 2025, includes the development of adequate infrastructure for the development of food security including partially underground greenhouses and capacity to increase our fields and chicken production. Research: our work is in indigenous crop varietals, and the restoration of these seeds and varieties for our communities, as well as providing educational information for tribal commmunities regionaly and nationally. Our research has included corn which adds nitrogen to the soil, heritage potato varieties, and fiber hemp varieties. Our work with the university of Minnesota is primariy on fiber hemp varieties and value added production options for tirbal hemp farmers. As well we work on soil health. We are able to work in smaller scale gardens and on larger crop acreage where we are restoring soil health and redeveloping indigenous fertilizers and crop rotations. We are specializing also in ojibwe purple potatoes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -97%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $672K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.