Great Lakes Section I'd the Institute of Food Technologists
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 386088857
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Grand Rapids, MI, USA
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $63,647
- Expenses
- $59,681
- Assets
- $110,917
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
People named in this filing
- MICHELLE COREY (CHAIRMAN)
- JEFF GARZA (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose and objectives are: 1. To promote interest in the field of food science and technology. 2. To encourage and provide the means for discussing and disseminating technical and other information relating to the production, packaging, distribution, preparation, evaluation, and utilization of food. 3. To advance the profession of food science and technology by promoting the maintenance of high professional standards amoung its members. 4. To promote cooperative relations between food industry members and the faculties and students of educational institutions within the sections area that give food science and technology and related courses.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization helped a number of students with transportation to attend educational meetings put on by the organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 6
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 9.5%; rating input score 9
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.2%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.86; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 9.5% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.