Croplife Latin America Inc C/o Daremblum & Herrera Abogados
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522290427
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Jose, San Jose, CS
- Phone
- 3053733713
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- International Agricultural Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,736,564
- Expenses
- $2,675,472
- Assets
- $2,550,801
- Liabilities
- $269,809
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jose Perdomo (President)
- Juan Pablo Lloblet (Vice-President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jose Perdomo (President): $404,822 total reported compensation
- Javier Fernandez (Regulatory/IP/Legal Direct): $181,877 total reported compensation
- Martin Zuniga (Director Central America &): $176,967 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Represent the Crop Science Industry in the Central and South American Regions, communicate its contributions to agriculture and educate on the safe and responsible use of pesticides.
What it reported doing in 2024
Central American OperationsCA&C is the region composed basically of the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic. In this region, the director of CropLife Latin America deals with the problems faced by the companies that make up the organization concerning market access, the import of their products, and the regulatory aspects governing registration and marketing. In 2024, work concentrated on defending the industry from applying regulations lacking science and technology or openly contrary to legislation, including the attempt to ban products. To this end, the Director of CLLA supported local associations in each country to define a strategy, gather technical and financial resources to implement it, and eventually participated in meetings with technical and administrative authorities to expose the R&D industry's position on issues such as molecule bans or proposals of new regulations for pesticide registration, with the objective that the changes always represent a regulatory improvement.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 84% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 11 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $405K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.