Mad Agriculture

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842223405
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
Phone
8052317462
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,534,101
Expenses
$2,389,685
Assets
$1,791,096
Liabilities
$23,349

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILIP TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIP TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $196,563 total reported compensation
  • TANNER STARBARD (CHIEF OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCE): $159,721 total reported compensation
  • HALEY BARON (CHIEF OF STAFF DEVELOPMENT): $151,854 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mad Agricultures mission is to create a regenerative revolution in agriculture. Regenerative agriculture is a place-based relational approach to farming that restores soil health increases biodiversity and renews the ecological cultural and economic vitality of working lands. It draws from many traditions including scientific and ancestral to heal relationships between people land and the systems that sustain us.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mad Media: The revolution in agriculture must be irresistible and it requires a movement of people businesses and land to create a new system. Our media work is igniting engagement in the regenerative movement by sharing its stories. Through a variety of storytelling mediums we are helping to explore and create the new agrarian culture. In these efforts we are dedicated to living the questions trusting that in the living we will find the answers. The art that we promote illuminates a connection to place to ecology and to a community of food. We lift up new voices. We spotlight the work of farmers who take radical and thoughtful approaches to their work. The Mad Agriculture Journal continued to serve as a cornerstone of MAD! s storytelling in2024 offering a biannual collection of essays photography and interviews that celebrate the people practices and philosophies driving the regenerative movement. Across the country our team hosted 17 Mad Agriculture events and spoke at 35 industry gatherings sharing insights with over 6,000 people in person. In 2024 Mad Media created Cultivating Conservation a dynamic storytelling platform that highlights the critical role of USDA conservation programs in supporting farmers and ranchers across the nation. The platform blends data with farmers stories to showcase the impact of these programs amplify the voices of regenerative farmers and allow viewers to explore both the quantitative and qualitative realities of leveraging USDA conservation dollars towards regeneration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80.7%; rating input score 81; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.3% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $197K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.