Icrisat
Legal name: International Crops Research Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237442567
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2023
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023
- Location
- Hyderabad, Telangana, India
- Phone
- +91 8455683071
- Rating
- 54
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Agricultural Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $47,095,361
- Expenses
- $39,731,864
- Assets
- $54,373,266
- Liabilities
- $15,186,084
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Dr Hughes Jacqueline d'Arros (Director General): $337,412 total reported compensation
- Dr Afari Sefa Victor (Global Research Program Director): $243,640 total reported compensation
- Mr Peachey Ramon Khemraj (Director Communications): $241,378 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To harness the power of frontier science and our specialized mandate crops — backed by over five decades of expertise — to continue driving transformative change across the drylands.
What it reported doing in 2023
Research Program - East and Southern Africa
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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
MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 41
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -41.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 61.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $24.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $337K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 to 2023
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 20 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.