International Association for Plant Taxonomy (USA)
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 520817253
- IRS 990-PF coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2019, Form 990-PF 2025
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2026330968
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Biological & Life Sciences
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $658,557
- Expenses
- $325,145
Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Overview
Mission
Biological & Life Sciences
What it reported funding in 2025
The foundation reported 51 filed grant rows totaling $101,378. The stated grant purposes included untangling the systematic diversity, distribution and conservation of genus morchella dill. ex pers., from the kaghan valley, kp, pakistan, dioecy and resiniferous flowers in clusieae tribe (clusiaceae): phylogeny and evolutionary patterns, and building a near-infrared spectral library to reveal new species of ecclinusa (sapotaceae, chrysophylloideae) in south america, plus 48 other reported purposes.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 71% of the foundation's positive operating resources came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The foundation combined direct charitable work with grants to other organizations or people.
- Includes asset-sale income: Asset-sale income is shown separately from recurring resources when classifying the revenue model.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes to charitable grants and the filing identifies who received its grants. A relatively small share of spending goes to grants and the filing reports one or more activities that warrant closer review.
Rating breakdown
- Grant Deployment: 100
- Cost Efficiency: 31
- Transparency: 100
- Compliance: 92
- Endowment Health: 75
Detailed rating inputs
Grant Deployment
- Grant deployment ratio: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Cost Efficiency
- Grant expense ratio: 31.2%; rating input score 31; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency
- Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100
Compliance
- Foundation activity disclosures: 16 of 19 controls in place; rating input score 84
- Property sale or exchange with a disqualified person: Pass
- Borrowing from or lending to a disqualified person: Pass
- Goods, services, or facilities involving a disqualified person: Fail
- Compensation paid to a disqualified person: Fail
- Assets transferred to a disqualified person: Pass
- Payment to a government official: Pass
- Uncorrected prior self-dealing: Pass
- Prior-year undistributed income: Pass
- Excess business holdings: Pass
- Investments that may jeopardize charitable purposes: Pass
- Uncorrected prior-year jeopardizing investments: Pass
- Attempt to influence legislation: Pass
- Attempt to influence an election: Pass
- Individual grants for travel, study or similar purposes: Fail
- Grants outside qualifying charitable organization categories: Pass
- Spending for a noncharitable purpose: Pass
- Funds received for a personal-benefit contract: Pass
- Premiums paid on a personal-benefit contract: Pass
- Prohibited tax-shelter transaction: Pass
- Filing consistency checks: 9; rating input score 100
Endowment Health
- Endowment-health comparison: 21.7; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Grants: 100% of grant recipient detail disclosed
- Payout: At least 100% grant deployment rate
- Trustees: Filed trustees detail
- Self-dealing: 100% of reviewed questions answered “No”
- Investments: 75th percentile for endowment coverage
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 52 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.
- Moderate — Cost Efficiency: Grant expense ratio scored 31/100.
- Review — Compliance: Foundation activity disclosures: 3 of 19 not reported.