Catskills Agrarian Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882674306
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hamden, NY, USA
Phone
6073973770
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food, Agriculture, and Nutrition N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,769,118
Expenses
$1,804,575
Assets
$310,052
Liabilities
$238,207

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JULIAN L WAKINS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMANDA WONG (DIRECTOR): $46,800 total reported compensation
  • TIANNA KENNEDY (COEXECUTIVE): $46,800 total reported compensation
  • FRANCIS YU (COEXECUTIVE): $46,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The catskills agrarian alliance models food sovereignty in our region by protecting and promoting the right of all people to healthy, culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, as well as by supporting our right to define our own food systems.

What it reported doing in 2024

Protecting and promoting the right of all people to healthy and, culturally approriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods , as well as by supporting the right to define their own food system. Also providing healthy foods produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods to individuals and wholesalers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 69.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 66.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 69.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.8% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $47K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.