International Alliance for Phytobiomes Research Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, the alliance's microbiome working group published a perspective article in phytopathology the article discusses challenges and opportunities in plant microbiome research within the phytobiome context and highlights actions to harness the power of plant microbiomes for societal benefits. The regulatory working group focused on developing a regulatory science roadmap to facilitate the commercialization of agricultural biologicals and microbial products. The animal microbiomes working group helped organize the workshop "the uniqueness and commonalities between plant, animal, and soil microbiomes" at the plant and animal genome conference in san diego. The controlled environment agriculture working group focused on identifying key challenged in controlled environment agriculture that can be addressed through phytobiomes research. The alliance also established the soil health working group and began discussions to identify research gaps and priorities. The alliance's united states culture collection network (usccn)project continued to expand its connections and promotion its online searchable registry of plant-associated microbial culture collections. Usccn organized 2 workshops in 2024 and organized a webinar. In june 2024, the alliance-coordinated project , genome sequence-based classification system for microbes, published the project findings. The microbes-4-climate: microbial services addressing climate change risks for biodiversity, agricultural and forestry ecosystems. This large transnational european project brings together 31 partners from 13 countries. The alliance organized 5 webinars with over 1700 registrations representing 86 countries, and organized 4 workshops. In november of 2024, the alliance organized an international phytobiomes conference, bringing together 147 scientists, researchers, industry experts and early-career scientists to share and discuss the latest advancements in phytobiomes research.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
• Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
• Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: Limited
• Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd 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: Fail
  • 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: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 34%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 40.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings