Plant Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463659796
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Hanford, CA, USA
Phone
5596333215
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,633
Expenses
$98,639
Assets
$55,548
Liabilities
$2,731

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DINO GIACOMAZZI (Chairman)
  • MICHAEL MIYA (Vice Chairman)
  • HELEN SULLIVAN (Secretary)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To foster a better appreciation and understanding of agriculture and agricultural products; and enhance the well-being of the public by encouraging health and nutritional food and/or fiber choices consisting of farm based products by providing and promoting agricultural education programs, including, but not limited to, instruction in the areas of plant, animal, food and nutrition sciences, through interactive scholastic courses and teaching methods.

What it reported doing in 2018

To provide and promote agricultural education programs to the public

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Assets have declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $93K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.