Mid South Institute of Food Technol Ogists
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271011888
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Horn Lake, MS, USA
- Rating
- 49
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,784
- Expenses
- $10,085
- Assets
- $83,696
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Chad Robertson (President)
- Colby Hall (Vice-President)
- Shecoya White (Past President)
People named in this filing
- Chad Robertson (President)
- Colby Hall (Vice-President)
- Shecoya White (Past President)
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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To educate members of updates in the food industry.
What it reported doing in 2023
Mid-South IFT meeting in Starkville MS to educate members on changes in the food industry, provide membership updates and guest speakers present on changes in food industry.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
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: 28
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 39%; rating input score 39
- Program expense ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 11
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -262.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.3; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 39% of revenue deployed · 10.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 11/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.