Cornell Agriculture and Food Technology Park Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161595380
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Geneva, NY, USA
Phone
3157810070
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,799,897
Expenses
$453,610
Assets
$7,573,176
Liabilities
$2,470,620

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENDAN TYDINGS (DIRECTOR & TREASURER): $20,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The tech farm's mission is to grow agribusiness, food science and biotechnology advancements and to provide facilities that foster commercialization of research, discovery, innovation and technology that is generated through cornell university for the purpose of strengthening the robust finger lakes and New York state agricultural and food ecosystem.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization's facilities are located on a 72-acre property known as the technology farm adjacent to cornell agritech in geneva, New York. Those facilities, which are owned and managed by the organization, include a 20,000 square foot business incubator facility that provides laboratory, office, and production space to a variety of tenants to support growth and innovation in the food and agribusiness sectors, and a 20,000 square foot multi-tenant industrial building . The organization is also a New York state certified business incubator that collaborates with cornell agritech in providing programming and technical assistance to start-up and emerging businesses in the agriculture and food technology fields.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.8%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 74.8%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.7; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.8% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $357K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.