Indiana Crop Improvement Associatio
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 350892904
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lafayette, IN, USA
- Phone
- 7655232535
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Agricultural Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,577,747
- Expenses
- $4,958,529
- Assets
- $6,514,606
- Liabilities
- $475,918
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WADE WILEY (PRESIDENT)
- CRAIG NELSON (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN ZHENG (CSO): $203,708 total reported compensation
- CRAIG NELSON (CEO): $179,975 total reported compensation
- LAURA DONALDSON (LAB DIRECTOR): $174,871 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Indiana crop improvement association is the official seed certifying agency for the state of Indiana. Its mission is to carry out the recordkeeping, field inspections, laboratory testing, post control grow out tests, issuance of official certification labels, and other activities associated with the certification of seeds and plant parts.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Indiana crop improvement association's principal program service is official seed certification. The objective of seed certification is to provide services to seed producers who the market certified seeds to farmers. This program services involves the maintenance of records, field inspections, seed testing, post control grow out tests for purity evaluations and the issuance of certified seed labels for seed meeting the official seed certification standards. The association served approximately 350 clients. Approximately 110,529 seed acres were inspected and 59,000 laboratory tests performed. Roughly 1,500 field grow outs were conducted to evaluate seed lot purity and approximately 2,000 seed labels were issued. The association held an annual meeting of its members providing education programs as well as the annual business meeting. Other educational and training meetings and seminars were held at the association's headquarters during the year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $204K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $107K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.