Berkshire Agricultural Ventures Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814386302
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Great Barrington, MA, USA
Phone
4136453594
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,132,615
Expenses
$1,467,493
Assets
$3,168,944
Liabilities
$494,436

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARYANN TEBBEN (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIK RASMUSSEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA BUSANSKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA BUSANSKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $99,250 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Berkshire agricultural ventures' mission is to support local farms and strengthen local food systems. We provide business assistance, flexible loans, and strategic resources to farmers and food producers in berkshire county, ma; litchfield county, ct; and columbia and dutchess counties, ny. In 2024, we provided over $420,000 in loans and served approximately 100 clients with well over 2,000 hours of business assistance. Our work has an impact on our local economy and community by helping farms grow and thrive, expanding access to local food, and keeping land in agriculture.

What it reported doing in 2025

Technical assistance: organization provides business and operational technical assistance to area farms and food businesses to improve business and local food system resiliency. Services include cohort-based learning and networking opportunities, workshops, business planning, grantwriting, online resources, climate risk assessments and adaptation recommendations, financial readiness, and other engagements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.7%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.6%; rating input score 80; 27th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 31.2%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.16; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.7% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.