Midwest Dry Bean Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934185560
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Fargo, ND, USA
Phone
7013655102
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$260,000
Expenses
$110,019
Assets
$149,981
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN BERTHOLD (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN BERTHOLD (PRESIDENT)
  • MITCH COULTER (VICE PRESIDE)
  • DYLAN KARLEY (SECRETARY TR)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively as a business league within the meaning of section 501(c)(6) of the internal recenue code of 1986 (or the corresponding provisions of any future united states internal revenue law), and the purposes and objectives of this corporation shall be as follows: a.to promote, domestically and internationally, the marketing and consumption of midwest-grown dry beans. B.to advocate for the nutritional benefits of dry bean consumption. C.to advocate for government purchases and consumption of midwest-grown dry beans, such as: .domestic food distribution programs (e.g. School lunch programs, section 32 purchases, commodity corporation food funds, etc.). .export food aid (e.g. Pl 480, world food program, mcgovern-dole, Kansas city commodities office, etc.). .addressing refulation that affects midwest-based dry bean production, processing, transportation, etc. .farm bill engagement and guidance. .crop insurance programs and policies. .me

What it reported doing in 2023

Mitch organized a call with the mdbc to capture inventories of beans so he could submit a bid to USAID & usda-ams. Here was the submission: 300,000 cwt pinto @58 = 17,400,000; 200,000 cwt black @63 = 12,600,000; 600,000 cwt navy @40 = 24,000,000; 200,000 cwt dark red kidney @55 = 11,000,000; 200,000 cwt light red kidney @55 = 11,000,000; 200,000 cwt great northern @58 = 11,600,000. Grand total: 1,700,000 cwt = 87.6 million

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.7%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.