Dairy Lab Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421102297
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
8006313510
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$291,595
Expenses
$791,479
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patrick Reisinger (President)
  • Matthew Berning (Vice President)
  • Terry Hopper (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Terry Hopper (CEO): $44,239 total reported compensation
  • Scott Petsche (CFO): $35,001 total reported compensation
  • Matt Fordyce (Treasurer): $420 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To maintain and operate progressive management information services for agriculture producers.

What it reported doing in 2022

Dairy Lab Services Inc provides services to 480 dairy producer members in Iowa and Illinois to enhance their ability to produce a better quality of milk output and increase productivity.Dairy Lab Services Inc is subject to and meets the requirements of the following regulatory agencies: Food and Drug Administration, Iowa Dept of Agriculture, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources, Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, National Dairy Herd Improvement Association. Trained qualified technicians perform Component and Quality Analysis of milk samples. Components are tested for: Butterfat, Protein, Somatic Cell Count, Lactose, Other Solids, Total Solids, Added Water and Milk Urea Nitrogen (MUN). Quality analysis of milk samples are tested for Plate Loop Count, Preliminary Incubation, Lab Pasteurization, Milk Coliform, Cryoscope, Sediment, Antibiotic, Direct Microscope SCC, Coliform and Nitrates (Water). Other analysis of milk samples includes: Mastitis Culturing and Mastitis DNA testing (to detect/identify/quantify Staph aureus, Strep agalactiae, Mycoplasma bovis, E coli, and other bacteria), Milk Pregnancy, and Johne's testing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 90
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: 60%; rating input score 60; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -171.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $44K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.