The Wisconsin Ffa Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930846582
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082181595
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development - Agricultural

Reported finances

Revenue
$661,107
Expenses
$664,791
Assets
$2,409,602
Liabilities
$173,938

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEB IHM (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • CHAD BRUSVEEN (PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY WILFERT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ABIGAIL QUINLAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU NOVEMBER 2024))
  • ELLEN SCHUTT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (STARTING MAY 2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • ABIGAIL QUINLAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU NOVEMBER 2024)): $65,273 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 Wisconsin ffa foundation builds relationships and encourages philanthropy to support and grow agricultural education and ffa.the national ffa organization is dedicated to making a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Wisconsin ffa foundation honors ffa members through proficiency awards, supervised agricultural experience (sae) program grants, post-secondary education scholarships, and state ffa degrees. The members earning the highest achievements are rewarded with cash awards, grant monies, scholarship monies, plaques, and trophies. The state ffa convention is held each june in madison. About 3,400 people attend the convention. The convention features competitions, educational workshops and other experiences, and recognition of members and chapters' accomplishments. Leadership programming is a core piece of the Wisconsin ffa foundation's programs. Our outreach supports training and development of the state ffa officers so they will have the tools to impact their local members and chapters during their year of service.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.5%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th 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: 85%; rating input score 85; 36th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.62; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.5% of revenue deployed · 57.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $381K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.