Minnesota Crop Improvement Assoc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410706907
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6126257766
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,154,494
Expenses
$3,433,194
Assets
$7,358,829
Liabilities
$491,166

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FAWAD SHAH (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • FAWAD SHAH (PRESIDENT/CE): $228,224 total reported compensation
  • CARL ANFINSON (INTERIM EXEC): $99,127 total reported compensation
  • SETH DAGOBERG (INTERIM EXEC): $94,539 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Minnesota crop improvement association is an organization dedicated to improving the productivity, profitability and competitive position of producers, processors and distributors of agricultural products by providing services to enable them to provide high-quality products to Minnesota, the united states and the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Certification services - verify conformance to standards and issue tags, seals, and other certification evidence for seed, noxious weed seed free forage and mulch, and identity preserved grain. Mcia is a usda national organic program (nop) accredited certifying agency (aca) in Minnesota and surrounding states for producers and handlers of organic crops, livestock, and food products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.