National Corn Growers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
420897662
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chesterfield, MO, USA
Phone
6367339004
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,810,126
Expenses
$22,064,437
Assets
$33,293,217
Liabilities
$16,208,498

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NEIL CASKEY (CEO)
  • KEN HARTMANN (PRESIDENT)
  • JED BOWER (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEIL CASKEY (CEO): $436,336 total reported compensation
  • BROOKE APPLETON (VP PUBLIC POLICY): $339,929 total reported compensation
  • JIM BAUMAN (VP OPERATIONS): $284,201 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 create and increase opportunities for corn growers as we seek to sustainably feed and fuel a growing world.

What it reported doing in 2024

The association's purpose is to enable corn growers to sustainably feed and fuel a growing world. Ncga works to create competitive market demand, enhance customer & consumer trust, and promote increased sustainable production, in conjunction with state corn & other organizations and other corn industry participants, in order to accomplish this vision. Founded in 1957, the national corn growers association represents nearly 35,000 dues-paying corn farmers nationwide and the interests of more than 300,000 corn farmers who contribute through corn checkoff programs in their states. Ncga and 50 state associations & checkoff organizations work together to create and increase opportunities for their members, corn farmers and their industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 12 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $436K · 28 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4M reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.