Professional Dairy Managers of Pa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
233066186
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Harrisburg, PA, USA
Phone
8773265993
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$462,060
Expenses
$312,458
Assets
$822,042
Liabilities
$28,175

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLEN BEHRER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALLEN BEHRER (PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA BIDDLE (DIRECTOR)
  • DAVE BITLER (TREASURER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Professional dairy managers is a farmer-driven organization advancing our state's dairy industry through improved productivity and economic viability with continued stewardship of our animals, environment, and community. To do this: pdmp provides education and professional development for dairy farmers by hosting programs with subject matter experts and networking opportunities to improve dairy producers' skills and increase knowledge that will help their profitability and sustainability. Pdmp is a dairy-only organization that brings progressive dairy producers to the discussion on matters of dairy policy that support the future viability of the dairy industry. Pdmp connects dairy farmers to opportunities to share their story with dairy consumers and influencers with the goal to correct misleading information and increase consumption of dairy products. Pdmp serves as a dairy farmer-driven catalyst to identify needs and opportunities for research that support improved environmental stew

What it reported doing in 2024

For the past 20 years, the professional dairy managers of Pennsylvania (pdmp) has partnered with penn state university in a corn silage hybrid testing and research program. Pdmp member farms in different regions of the state volunteer a plot of land on which a variety of seeds are planted and from which crops are analyzed. In recent years, results around ndf and starch digestibility yielded much needed discussion about the impact of corn silage in rations for dairy cattle. In 2024, a total of 95 entries from 11 different seed companies were entered into the program and the results were published and made available online for all dairy farms and their nutritionists. In 2024, pdmp recruited 65 dairy farms to participate in the usda climate smart commodities grant program in which pdmp partnered with penn state university to reimburse dairy farms for costs to implement practices to reduce their ghgs, scientifically measure the reductions when possible and test the voluntary carbon market for pa's smaller sized dairies. In 2024 pdmp financed a milk supply study of Pennsylvania's milkshed to help the industry and commonwealth determine what, if anything makes the state attractive to investment in dairy processing. The analysis was completed and released in 2024 and pdmp held meetings throughout the year to review the results with our progressive dairy farm members and industry leaders, leadership in the pa general assembly, the pa department of agriculture, and the pa department of community and economic development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.4%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.63; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.2% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.