Mendocino County Farm Bureau
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941181123
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Ukiah, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7074626664
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Farm Bureau, Grange
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $555,949
- Expenses
- $430,183
- Assets
- $4,771,817
- Liabilities
- $57,961
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ESTELLE CLIFTON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- HENRY ADAM GASKA (SECRETARY &): $88,760 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To work for the solution of the problems of the farm, the farm home, and the rural community, by use of the recognized advantages of organized action to the end that those engaged in the various branches of agriculture may have opportunity for happiness and prosperity in their chosen work; to further the social, educational and recreational welfare of its member in any wholesome and beneficial manner; to work in conjunction with the agricultural extension service in the development of agriculture in all it branches, and in the improvement of rural life; to encourage and foster the development of such commodity marketing and other organizations as will best serve the members of the corporation in conformity with the objects and purposes of this organization; to unite the farmers of the county in one farm organization and to work for the promotion and protection of interests common to all farmers in the county without regard to political or other organizations; to cooperate with other co
What it reported doing in 2024
The mendocino county farm bureau awarded scholarships to deserving students with a desire to start a career in the agricultural industry. The student criteria is unique in the fact that applicants can be continuing students of any age entering or attending an accredited trade school, college or university, including out-of-state, and majoring in an agricultural related field.
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 87% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.8%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 61.1%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 22.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.09; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.8% of revenue deployed · 61.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 22 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $263K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 23 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.