Tilth Producers of Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721577554
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2066327506
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$398,784
Expenses
$390,308
Assets
$210,381
Liabilities
$7,265

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Diane Dempster (Vice President)
  • Anne Schwartz (Vice President)
  • Addie Candib (Vice President)
  • Becky Warner (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michele Catalano (Executive Dir.): $64,459 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Education about and promotion of sustainable agriculture in Washington.

What it reported doing in 2014

Other - Includes WebTech programs to provide web-based educational information for members; Consumer Education to educate consumers on the benefits of supporting local organic growers (campaigns reached approximately --- people through media partnerships); Policy programs to inform supporters of issues affecting growers; Membership program activities; Information Services to publish the Tilth Producers Quarterly, a research-based journal published for the benefit of members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

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; 79th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $261K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.