The Arizona Agricultural Education Ffa Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860531662
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Glendale, AZ, USA
Phone
6232050370
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,158,382
Expenses
$876,951
Assets
$3,749,197
Liabilities
$182,242

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FARRAH SMITH (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT PILCHARD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • STEPHEN GOUCHER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ROCHELL PLANTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROCHELL PLANTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,399 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation cultivates strategic partnerships and secures financial resources to invest in Arizona's ffa members, agricultural educators, & communities. Thus, we empower ffa members to develop strong leadership skills, achieve personal growth, & build successful careers.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Arizona agricultural education ffa foundation supports the educational and leadership effectiveness of the Arizona association ffa alumni association, the department of agricultural education at the university of Arizona, and the Arizona agricultural teachers association, while maintaining positive relationships with students, teachers, business and industry representatives, and the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.6%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.9%; rating input score 96; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.3%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.28; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.6% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $676K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $117K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $156K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.