Sugarbeet Advancement

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383343559
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Frankenmuth, MI, USA
Phone
9893927805
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,745
Expenses
$47,490
Assets
$240,086
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DAN GOWEN (5TH MEMBER)
  • ZACK YOUNG (MEMBER)
  • ROB STOUTENBURG (MEMBER)

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

To generate research and utilize education to enhance productivity and profitability of the great lakes sugarbeet industry. This will be accomplished through the cooperative effects of Michigan state university, Michigan sugar company, producers and agribusiness. The sugarbeet advacement committee will be active in identifying research needs, conducting educational programming and identifying promotional and financial support to accomplish established goals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing research demonstrations, education, instructional materials and to engage in any other activities necessary or appropriate for improving the production of sugarbeets in Michigan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 44.2%; rating input score 44
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 0.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44% of revenue deployed · 44.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 24 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.