South Dakota Beef Industry Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460342595
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pierre, SD, USA
Phone
6052244722
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,578,131
Expenses
$3,436,073
Assets
$565,540
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARL SANDERS (PRESIDENT)
  • KENT VANDERWAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JODIE ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JON DILWORTH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JODIE ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $74,066 total reported compensation
  • JON DILWORTH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $10,000 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 collect and administer the $1 beef checkoff program for the state of South Dakota. The beef checkoff program is used to promote, educate and provide research for the benefits of beef.

What it reported doing in 2024

Collects and administers the $1 beef checkoff on cattle sold in South Dakota. Checkoff dollars are utilized strictly for promotion, education, or research programs. 50 cents of every dollar is directed to the cattlemens beef board, which oversees the national checkoff program and is responsible for the certification of qualified state beef councils. 50 cents of each dollar collected is retained and a portion may be invested in the national checkoff programs through the federation division of the national cattlemens beef association to further extend national and international beef promotional efforts with a unified state-national partnership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -35.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 26 current checks pass · 16 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.