Potato Growers of Michigan Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382980097
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
East Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5172537370
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,612
Expenses
$84,613
Assets
$175,580
Liabilities
$3,000

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Denniss Iott (President)
  • Jason Walther (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Denniss Iott (President)
  • Jason Walther (Vice President)
  • Jeff Thorlund (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

As the key advocate for Michigan potato growers, Potato Growers of Michigan Inc members work to ensure that reliable economic data and sound science is the basis of decisions in Lansing that impact growers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Potato Growers of Michigan, Inc ensures decision makers in Lansing have reliable and accurate scientific information regarding issues that could have an impact on potato production in Michigan. By doing so, Potato Growers of Michigan, Inc has helped influence decisions related to water usage issues, appropriation for plant commodity research, maintaining potatoes in school lunch programs, maintaining registrations of key pest controls and sprout inhibitors, and other impactful legislation related to potato production.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 3
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.6%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.08; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.6% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.