San Joaquin Section of the Institute of Food Technologistsinc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 471206207
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Clovis, CA, USA
- Rating
- 42
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $57,540
- Expenses
- $64,461
- Assets
- $51,359
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DANIEL HILDAGO (PRESIDENT)
- TRISH HOLMAN (PRESIDENT EL)
People named in this filing
- CIARA HERNANDEZ (PAST PRESIDE)
- KADY FANCONE (MEMBER)
- DANIEL HILDAGO (PRESIDENT)
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
Educational: to encourage and provide the means for discussing and disseminating technical and other information to its membership relating to the production, processing, packaging, distribution, preparation, evaluation, and utilization of food. Educational scholarships and job creation: to provide financial and volunteer support for educational activities and programs involved in the field of food science and technology. Public awareness: to promote interest in the field of food science and technology.
What it reported doing in 2024
Support for national organization of institue of food technologists.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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: 9
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 14.8%; rating input score 15
- 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: -12%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 14.8% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 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 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.