Minnesota Bio-fuels Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452380387
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Burnsville, MN, USA
Phone
6513564330
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,124,613
Expenses
$1,036,561
Assets
$960,962
Liabilities
$71,991

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN WERNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BRIAN KLETSCHER (PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS HARWOOD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN WERNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $215,303 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advocate for the renewable fuels industry in Minnesota to achieve the collective goals of better air quality, stronger rural and agricultural economies, lower prices for consumers at the pump and domestic energy independence

What it reported doing in 2025

Government Relations: Worked with the legislature and the MN department of Agriculture to advocate for existing state incentive programs that promote the production and comsumption of biofuels. Expanding Markets For Biofuel Through Fuel Supply Chain Activities: Partnered with an external contractor to realize enhanced market penetration for renewable fuels by working with retail gas stations to provide awareness of federal and state biofuel infrastructure grant availability. Developed and implemented communication and educational outreach to consumers, students and the public about the benefits of biofuels and promoted programming related to the prganization s mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.8%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 21
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 38.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.8% of revenue deployed · 21.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $153K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.