Pacific Island Farmers Organisation Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872964127
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kapolei, HI, USA
Phone
8082134893
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,066,131
Expenses
$2,901,855
Assets
$1,993,085
Liabilities
$1,449,453

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLE STICE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • KYLE STICE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY): $191,413 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 empower farmer organizations in the Pacific Islands, enhancing their vibrancy, viability, and sustainability. The organization is dedicated to fostering effective engagement with farmers and strengthening these organizations as key agents in improving the livelihoods of rural households across the Pacific Islands region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Project APFP PIFON signed a Letter of Agreement (LOA) with the Asia Farmers Association (AFA) under the Asia Pacific Farmers Program (APFP) in 2019 for a total project value of USD 240,000, representing 8% of the total project budget of USD 3 million. Breadfruit has been identified as the priority commodity for the Pacific under APFP, and the project aims to engage with nine PIFON member countries, including: Cook Islands, Fiji, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor Leste, Tonga, and Vanuatu. Through APFP, PFO has facilitated direct support to its FO members in the North Pacific (Marshall Islands and Federated States of Micronesia). APFP concludes in June 2025. The Asia-Pacific Farmers Program (APFP) is designed to support and empower smallholder and vulnerable farmers and rural producers-both men and women-by working through their farmer organizations (FOs) across 29 countries in Asia and the Pacific. It primarily targets smallholder farmers who are members or potential members of local and national FOs, including those with the potential to become active participants in emerging agricultural value chains through improved access to quality FO services. The overall goal of the APFP is to contribute to an enabling environment for rural poverty reduction by strengthening the capacity of smallholders and their organizations at national, sub-regional, and regional levels. Its specific objective is to enhance the professional capacities of FOs so they can deliver sustainable, demand-driven business and technical services, and effectively engage in policy dialogue that leads to improved livelihoods and incomes for smallholder farmers and producers. The project consists of three key components-(i) FO services development, (ii) policy engagement, and (iii) project management and monitoring & evaluation (M&E)-and will begin with mapping and profiling activities to produce and disseminate national directories of mapped, registered, and active FOs and agricultural development platforms.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.73; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 73.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 73.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 80.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 46 of 47 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.