Maine Food Producers Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270563276
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Augusta, ME, USA
Phone
2076208226
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,252
Expenses
$34,253
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CATHE MORRILL (CHAIR 2012-2013)
  • MARK DVOROZNIAK (VICE CHAIR)
  • JOAN ANDERSON (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To understand and accurately represent the needs of Maine's food production and manufacturing industry and to build on Maine's unique quality of life brand, open new markets, and strengthen relationships with industry support organizations.

What it reported doing in 2013

The alliance provides its members with direct access to buyers and markets, unique marketing opportunities, and a way to tap into a network of colleagues, contacts, referrals and resources. The alliance sponsors an annual summit and showcases members at national conventions, and sponsored strategic forums, workshops and networking events. Through professional support and education, it has helped move Maine manufacturers from processing to gift shop, specialty shop and supermarket shelves. It has had a direct and measurable impact on small and large food producers throughout the state of Maine.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.9%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 20.6%; rating input score 21

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -49.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -87.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.9% of revenue deployed · 20.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.