Crop Science Society of America Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 396093141
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Madison, WI, USA
- Phone
- 6082684941
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,625,942
- Expenses
- $2,766,280
- Assets
- $9,953,385
- Liabilities
- $5,591,208
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK SORRELLS (PRESIDENT)
- FLEIX FRITSCHI (PRESIDENT - ELECT)
- KIM GARLAND-CAMPBELL (PAST PRESIDENT)
- JAMES CUDAHY (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES CUDAHY (CEO): $451,072 total reported compensation
- LUTHER SMITH (CAO): $299,722 total reported compensation
- IAN POPKEWITZ (DIRECTOR OF IT): $243,405 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To disseminate information concerning crops and the conditions affecting them in order to contribute to general human welfare. Promote basic and applied research, foster high standards in educational matters, shall make available information on crop science, shall offer public services as related to these.
What it reported doing in 2025
Scientific periodicals: crop science society of america journal 2800 subscribersjournal of environmental quality 2100 subscribersother scientific periodicals, meeting abstracts, books, monographs and special series
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.3%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 67.8%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.6; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.3% of revenue deployed · 67.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $451K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.