TY 2014 Form 990

Part X Balance Sheet Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part X ..............
	1	Cash–non-interest-bearing .............	300,000	1	2,157,805
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........	1,990,042	2	2,251,560
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........		3	0
4	Accounts receivable, net .............	795,248	4	191,573
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
			5	0
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
			6	0
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............		7	0
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............		8	0
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........		9	0
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b			10c	0
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........		11	0
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....		12	0
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....		13	0
14	Intangible assets ...............		14	0
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........		15	4,514
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......	3,085,290	16	4,605,452
	17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........	2,601,060	17	1,149,884
18	Grants payable .................		18
19	Deferred revenue ................		19
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............		20
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..		21
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........		22
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..		23
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....		24
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................		25
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........	2,601,060	26	1,149,884
		Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............	484,230	27	3,455,568
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........		28
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........		29
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........		30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....		31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds		32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........	484,230	33	3,455,568
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........	3,085,290	34	4,605,452

- TIN:

SCHEDULE A
(Form 990 or 990EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Public Charity Status and Public Support

Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.
right arrow

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
right arrow

Information about Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

NORTH CENTRAL SOYBEAN RESEARCH PROGRAM

Employer identification number

42-1394799

Part I

Reason for Public Charity Status (All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions.

The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 11, check only one box.)

A church, convention of churches, or association of churches described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(i).

A school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). (Attach Schedule E.)

A hospital or a cooperative hospital service organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii).

A medical research organization operated in conjunction with a hospital described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). Enter the hospital's name, city, and state:

An organization operated for the benefit of a college or university owned or operated by a governmental unit described in

section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.)

A federal, state, or local government or governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(v).

An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

A community trust described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 331/3% of its support from contributions, membership fees, and gross

receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 331/3% of

its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses

acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.)

An organization organized and operated exclusively to test for public safety. See section 509(a)(4).

An organization organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2). See section 509(a)(3). Check the box in lines 11a through 11d that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 11e, 11f, and 11g.

Type I. A supporting organization operated, supervised, or controlled by its supported organization(s), typically by giving the supported organization(s) the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the directors or trustees of the supporting organization. You must complete Part IV, Sections A and B.

Type II. A supporting organization supervised or controlled in connection with its supported organization(s), by having control or management of the supporting organization vested in the same persons that control or manage the supported organization(s). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and C.

Type III functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with, and functionally integrated with, its supported organization(s) (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A, D, and E.

Type III non-functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with its supported organization(s) that is not functionally integrated. The organization generally must satisfy a distribution requirement and an attentiveness requirement (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and D, and Part V.

Check this box if the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, Type III functionally integrated, or Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organization.

Enter the number of supported organizations .............................

Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).

(i)Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	(iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document?		(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)
(i)Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	Yes	No	(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)


Total

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990EZ.

Cat. No. 11285F

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 2

Part II

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....	3,704,758	3,453,345	2,989,502	2,855,813	3,172,734	16,176,152
2	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.......						0
3	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..						0
4	Total. Add lines 1 through 3	3,704,758	3,453,345	2,989,502	2,855,813	3,172,734	16,176,152
5	The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f)..						0
6	Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.						16,176,152

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
7	Amounts from line 4..	3,704,758	3,453,345	2,989,502	2,855,813	3,172,734	16,176,152
8	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...	2,032	339	2,452	1,359	6,812	12,994
9	Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..						0
10	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.)..						0
11	Total support Add lines 7 through 10.						16,189,146

Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (see instructions) ..................

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here........................................ right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2014 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) .........

99.920 %

Public support percentage for 2013 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 ...............

99.950 %

16a

33 1/3% support test—2014. If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box
and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....................... right arrow

33 1/3% support test—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this
box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..................... right arrow

17a

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2014. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b, and line 14
is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain
in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported
organization ..................................................... right arrow

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a, and line
15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here.
Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly
supported organization ................................................ right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a, or 17b, check this box and see
instructions ..................................................... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 9 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part II.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .
2	Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose......
3	Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513..
4	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf...
5	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
6	Total. Add lines 1 through 5.
7a	Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons...
b	Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year.
c	Add lines 7a and 7b..
8	Public support (Subtract line 7c from line 6.)

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
9	Amounts from line 6...
10a	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
b	Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975.
c	Add lines 10a and 10b.
11	Net income from unrelated business activities not included in line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.
12	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) ..
13	Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.)..

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization,
check this box and stop here............................................. right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2014 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage from 2013 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 ...............

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage

Investment income percentage for 2014 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) ......

Investment income percentage from 2013 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 .............

19a

33 1/3% support tests—2014. If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....... right arrow

33 1/3% support tests—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3% and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization .... right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a, or 19b, check this box and see instructions .... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 4

Part IV

Supporting Organizations

(Complete only if you checked a box on line 11 of Part I. If you checked 11a of Part I, complete Sections A and B. If you checked 11b of Part I, complete Sections A and C. If you checked 11c of Part I, complete Sections A, D, and E. If you checked 11d of Part I, complete Sections A and D, and complete Part V.)

Section A. All Supporting Organizations

Yes

Are all of the organization’s supported organizations listed by name in the organization’s governing documents?
If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organizations are designated. If designated by class or purpose,
describe the designation. If historic and continuing relationship, explain.

Did the organization have any supported organization that does not have an IRS determination of status under section 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how the organization determined that the supported organization was described in section 509(a)(1) or (2).

Did the organization have a supported organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6)? If "Yes," answer (b) and (c) below.

Did the organization confirm that each supported organization qualified under section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) and satisfied the public support tests under section 509(a)(2)? If "Yes," describe in Part VI when and how the organization made the determination.

Did the organization ensure that all support to such organizations was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization put in place to ensure such use.

Was any supported organization not organized in the United States ("foreign supported organization")? If “Yes” and if you checked 11a or 11b in Part I, answer (b) and (c) below.

Did the organization have ultimate control and discretion in deciding whether to make grants to the foreign supported organization? If “Yes,” describe in Part VI how the organization had such control and discretion despite being controlled or supervised by or in connection with its supported organizations....

Did the organization support any foreign supported organization that does not have an IRS determination under sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1) or (2)? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI what controls the organization used to ensure that all support to the foreign supported organization was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes.

Did the organization add, substitute, or remove any supported organizations during the tax year? If “Yes,” answer (b) and (c) below (if applicable). Also, provide detail in Part VI, including (i) the names and EIN numbers of the supported organizations added, substituted, or removed, (ii) the reasons for each such action, (iii) the authority under the organization's organizing document authorizing such action, and (iv) how the action was accomplished (such as by amendment to the organizing document).

Type I or Type II only. Was any added or substituted supported organization part of a class already designated in the organization's organizing document?

Substitutions only. Was the substitution the result of an event beyond the organization's control?

Did the organization provide support (whether in the form of grants or the provision of services or facilities) to anyone other than (a) its supported organizations; (b) individuals that are part of the charitable class benefited by one or more of its supported organizations; or (c) other supporting organizations that also support or benefit one or more of the filing organization’s supported organizations? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did the organization provide a grant, loan, compensation, or other similar payment to a substantial contributor (defined in IRC 4958(c)(3)(C)), a family member of a substantial contributor, or a 35-percent controlled entity with regard to a substantial contributor? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990) .

Did the organization make a loan to a disqualified person (as defined in section 4958) not described in line 7? If “Yes,” complete Part II of Schedule L (Form 990).

Was the organization controlled directly or indirectly at any time during the tax year by one or more disqualified persons as defined in section 4946 (other than foundation managers and organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or (2))? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did one or more disqualified persons (as defined in line 9(a)) hold a controlling interest in any entity in which the supporting organization had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did a disqualified person (as defined in line 9(a)) have an ownership interest in, or derive any personal benefit from, assets in which the supporting organization also had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

10a

Was the organization subject to the excess business holdings rules of IRC 4943 because of IRC 4943(f) (regarding certain Type II supporting organizations, and all Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations)? If “Yes,” answer b below.

10a

Did the organization have any excess business holdings in the tax year? (Use Schedule C, Form 4720, to determine whether the organization had excess business holdings).

10b

Has the organization accepted a gift or contribution from any of the following persons?

A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described in (b) and (c) below, the governing body of a supported organization?

11a

A family member of a person described in (a) above?

11b

A 35% controlled entity of a person described in (a) or (b) above? If “Yes” to a, b, or c, provide detail in Part VI.

11c

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 5

Part IV

Supporting Organizations (continued)

Section B. Type I Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the directors, trustees, or membership of one or more supported organizations have the power to regularly appoint or elect at least a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees at all times during the tax year? If “No,” describe in Part VI how the supported organization(s) effectively operated, supervised, or controlled the organization’s activities. If the organization had more than one supported organization, describe how the powers to appoint and/or remove directors or trustees were allocated among the supported organizations and what conditions or restrictions, if any, applied to such powers during the tax year.

Did the organization operate for the benefit of any supported organization other than the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI how providing such benefit carried out the purposes of the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised or controlled the supporting organization.

Section C. Type II Supporting Organizations

Yes

Were a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees during the tax year also a majority of the directors or trustees of each of the organization’s supported organization(s)? If “No,” describe in Part VI how control or management of the supporting organization was vested in the same persons that controlled or managed the supported organization(s).

Section D. All Type III Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the organization provide to each of its supported organizations, by the last day of the fifth month of the organization’s tax year, (1) a written notice describing the type and amount of support provided during the prior tax year, (2) a copy of the Form 990 that was most recently filed as of the date of notification, and (3) copies of the organization’s governing documents in effect on the date of notification, to the extent not previously provided?

Were any of the organization’s officers, directors, or trustees either (i) appointed or elected by the supported organization(s) or (ii) serving on the governing body of a supported organization? If "No," explain in Part VI how the organization maintained a close and continuous working relationship with the supported organization(s).

By reason of the relationship described in (2), did the organization’s supported organizations have a significant voice in the organization’s investment policies and in directing the use of the organization’s income or assets at all times during the tax year? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role the organization’s supported organizations played in this regard.

Section E. Type III Functionally-Integrated Supporting Organizations

Check the box next to the method that the organization used to satisfy the Integral Part Test during the year (see instructions):

The organization satisfied the Activities Test. Complete line 2 below.

The organization is the parent of each of its supported organizations. Complete line 3 below.

The organization supported a governmental entity. Describe in Part VI how you supported a government entity (see instructions)

Activities Test. Answer (a) and (b) below.

Yes

Did substantially all of the organization’s activities during the tax year directly further the exempt purposes of the supported organization(s) to which the organization was responsive? If "Yes," then in Part VI identify those supported organizations and explain how these activities directly furthered their exempt purposes, how the organization was responsive to those supported organizations, and how the organization determined that these activities constituted substantially all of its activities.

Did the activities described in (a) constitute activities that, but for the organization’s involvement, one or more of the organization’s supported organization(s) would have been engaged in? If "Yes," explain in Part VI the reasons for the organization’s position that its supported organization(s) would have engaged in these activities but for the organization’s involvement.

Parent of Supported Organizations. Answer (a) and (b) below.

Did the organization have the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the officers, directors, or trustees of each of the supported organizations? Provide details in Part VI.

Did the organization exercise a substantial degree of direction over the policies, programs and activities of each of its supported organizations? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role played by the organization in this regard.

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 6

Part V – Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations

1. Check here if the organization satisfied the Integral Part Test as a qualifying trust on Nov. 20, 1970. See instructions. All other Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations must complete Sections A through E.

	Section A - Adjusted Net Income		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Net short-term capital gain	1
2	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	2
3	Other gross income (see instructions)	3
4	Add lines 1 through 3	4
5	Depreciation and depletion	5
6	Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions)	6
7	Other expenses (see instructions)	7
8	Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4)	8

	Section B - Minimum Asset Amount		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year):	1
a	Average monthly value of securities	1a
b	Average monthly cash balances	1b
c	Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets	1c
d	Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c)	1d
e	Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI):
2	Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets	2
3	Subtract line 2 from line 1d	3
4	Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 1-1/2% of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions).	4
5	Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3)	5
6	Multiply line 5 by .035	6
7	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	7
8	Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6)	8

	Section C - Distributable Amount		Current Year
1	Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A)	1
2	Enter 85% of line 1	2
3	Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A)	3
4	Enter greater of line 2 or line 3	4
5	Income tax imposed in prior year	5
6	Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions)	6
7	Check here if the current year is the organization's first as a non-functionally-integrated Type III supporting organization (see instructions)

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 7

Section D - Distributions		Current Year
1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes
2 Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity
3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations
4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets
5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required)
6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions
7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6.
8 Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions
9 Distributable amount for 2014 from Section C, line 6
10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount

Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions)		(i) Excess Distributions	(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2014	(iii) Distributable Amount for 2014
1 Distributable amount for 2014 from Section C, line 6
2 Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2014 (reasonable cause required--see instructions)
3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2014:
a From 2009.......X
b From 2010.......X
c From 2011.......X
d From 2012.......X
e From 2013.......
fTotal of lines 3a through e
g Applied to underdistributions of prior years
h Applied to 2014 distributable amount
i Carryover from 2009 not applied (see instructions)
j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from 3f.
4Distributions for 2014 from Section D, line 7:
$
a Applied to underdistributions of prior years
b Applied to 2014 distributable amount
c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from 4.
5 Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2014, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2 (if amount greater than zero, see instructions)
6 Remaining underdistributions for 2014. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1 (if amount greater than zero, see instructions)
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2015. Add lines 3j and 4c.
8 Breakdown of line 7:
a From 2010.......X
b From 2011.......X
c From 2012.......X
d From 2013.......
e From 2014.......

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) (2014)

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 8

Part VI

Supplemental Information. Provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; Part III, line 12; Part IV, Section A, lines 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5a, 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 11a, 11b, and 11c; Part IV, Section B, lines 1 and 2; Part IV, Section C, line 1; Part IV, Section D, lines 2 and 3; Part IV, Section E, lines 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b; Part V, line 1; Part V, Section B, line 1e; Part V Section D, lines 5, 6, and 8; and Part V, Section E, lines 2, 5, and 6. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).

Facts And Circumstances Test

Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:	14000265
Software Version:	2014v5.0

- TIN:

SCHEDULE O
(Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ

Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on
Form 990 or 990-EZ or to provide any additional information.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
MediumBullet

Information about Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at
www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

NORTH CENTRAL SOYBEAN RESEARCH PROGRAM

Employer identification number

42-1394799

Return Reference	Explanation
Form 990, Part VI, Line 11b: Form 990 Review Process	PRESENTED TO THE BOARD AT THE MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 11, 2015
Form 990, Part VI, Line 12c: Explanation of Monitoring and Enforcement of Conflicts	ANNUALLY THE BOARD IS REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE CONFLICTING INTERESTS. BOARD MEMBERS ARE REQUIRED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM ANY VOTE IF THERE IS A CONFLICT.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 19: Other Organization Documents Publicly Available	Governing documents, conflict of interest policy and financial statements are available to the public upon request.
Program Description (20)	(20) Project Title: Evaluation and Development of a Biological Control Product to Control Soybean Sudden Death Syndrome and White MoldPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: X.B. Yang, Iowa State University, xbyang@iastate.eduShrishail Navi, Iowa State University, ssnavi@iastate.edu Carl Alan Bradley, University of Illinois carlbrad@illinois.edu Youfu Zhao, University of Illinois, zhao888@illinois.edu James Kurle, University of Minnesota, kurle001@umn.eduBudget Amount and Project Year: $175,947, 2nd year of three year projectBrief Statement of Objectives: Sudden death syndrome (SDS) and white mold are two of the most important fungal diseases in soybean production in the US, affecting 40 - 50 million acres in the North Central Region. These two diseases threaten the sustainable production of soybean in the North Central Region. Biological control products are the future for disease management in row crops and private industry has made significant progress in development of biological fungicides for row crops. The goal of this proposal is to evaluate their effectiveness of potential biological control agent in other states of the North Central Region and develop the agent into a product for commercial use, which will provide reliable and cost-effective control of SDS and white mold of soybean. Project Objectives: oTo conduct multi-state field evaluation for fungal biological control agents that are found effective in reducing soybean sudden death syndrome and white mold.oTo investigate a wide-host-range bacterial bio-control agent that is effective in killing SDS and white mold pathogens for management of SDS and white mold in Illinois.oTo collect data of prototype product of the biological control agent for commercializationoTo determine if application of the biocontrol agent to crop residues of corn, alfalfa, or soybean can reduce inoculums production, infection, and disease caused by F. virguliforme and Sclerotinia.
Program Descriptions (1) through (5)	(1) Project Title: Breeding to improve resistance to SDS in soybean as a means to protect yield Delivering resistant varieties and linesPrincipal Investigador: Silvia R. Cianzio, scianzio@iastate.edu. Co-Pis: B. Diers, J. Orf. D. Wang, P. Chen, S. Kantartzi, G. Hartmann, J. Bond Budget Amount: $176,663 Year: 2 of 3 Brief Statement of Objectives: Breeding high yield SDS-resistant soybean cultivars in Maturity Groups I to VI for farmers, and seed industry. Objectives that support Objective 1: 1) Identify new sources of resistance to SDS; 2) Evaluation of SDS-field resistance of public experimental linesBackground information. An ideal production approach for managing sudden death syndrome (SDS) is the planting of resistant cultivars. Development of soybean resistant cultivars is difficult and time consuming, since SDS genetic resistance is determined by numerous genes, each and every one interacting with the production environment. The number of SDS-resistant cultivars is presently limited. A group of soybean breeders already working on developing SDS resistant germplasm at different institutions was brought together to this project. (2) Project Title: Enhancing disease resistance through biotechnologyPrincipal Investigators: Tom Clemente (University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Dept. of Agronomy & Horticulture, N308 Beadle Center, Lincoln, NE 68588-0665) e-mail: tclemente1@unl.edu phone: 402-472-1428 fax: 402-472-3139Budget Amount & Project Year: $149, 445 / 2014-2015Statement of Objectives:Our team is designing genetic constructs under control of two different constitutive promoters elements that will express two distinct types of interfering RNAs, small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) or microRNAs (miRNAs). Our approach, first utilizes a developed throughput screen to identify additional target genes in the aphid and two, prioritize these targets gene, coupled with appropriate promoter elements for whole plant transformations. This transdisciplinary approach incorporates expertise in entomology, plant pathology and biotechnology uniquely positions us to address this challenging pest of soybean. Towards this effort we are utilizing a high throughput screen to identify additional targets for silencing in aphids as a means to perturb the insects life cycle, and two, producing transgenic soybean events and subsequently phenotyping T2 populations for resistance.(3) Project Title: Acceleration of Soybean Yield and Composition Improvement through Genomic SelectionPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: Brian Diers, Matt Hudson, Pat Brown, Randall Nelson, Katy Martin Rainey, Bill Beavis, Asheesh Singh, George Graef, Jim Specht, and Aaron LorenzBudget Amount and Project Year: Year 1, $354,328Brief Statement of Objectives:The overall objective of this project is to use results from the large, USB funded SoyNAM project to predict the performance of new experimental lines and to test whether these predictions result in the selection of better lines than traditional breeding methods. If these new methods are successful, this will increase the rate of genetic gain in breeding programs. Below are the specific project objectives. The first objective is to test genomic selection in breeding populations. This first step is to use the dataset from the SoyNAM project to optimize methods for using genetic markers to predict yield, protein concentration, and maturity of soybean lines (this is called genomic prediction and when plants or lines are selected with this method, it is call genomic selection). In this objective, predictions for the traits can be made and compared to trait data that is available. The second step is to conduct a breeding experiment using the optimized genomic selection approaches in populations of breeding lines developed by each cooperating breeder. Within each population, lines selected using genomic selection and traditional approaches will be compared to determine which method was the most successful. The second objective is to use of genomic data to decide what cross combinations should be made by breeders. We will develop methods for selecting specific combinations of parents for crossing in soybean breeding nurseries. Once these methods are developed, they will be used by breeders to help them decide what cross combinations to make(4) Project Title: Increasing profits through genetic resistance to SDS Principle Investigator and Co-PIs: Brian Diers, Osman Radwan, Glen Hartman, Jason Bond, James Orf, Dechun Wang Budget Amount and Project Year: Year 2, total budget $166,269Brief Statement of Objectives:The overall objective of this research is to increase profits through improving yields with genetic resistance to SDS. The specific objectives of the project are:Objective 1. Map locations on chromosomes of genes that confer resistance to SDS. This mapping is being done in Minnesota and Michigan using two genetic populations in each state.Objective 2. Confirm and deploy SDS resistance genes. This is being done to determine if previously mapped genes are useful in different genetic backgrounds and environments.Objective 3. Identify genes involved in SDS resistance by gene expression profiling soybean roots and leaves. To complete this work, the level of gene expression was estimated for soybean roots and leaves using pairs of soybean lines that differ for SDS resistance genes but are otherwise almost completely identical (these are called near isogenic lines or NILs).(5) Project Title: Exploiting Potential Bio-control Agents to Manage Seedling Diseases of SoybeanLead PI: Ahmad Fakhoury, amfakhou@siu.eduIssue and Objectives: The long-term objective of the proposed research is to characterize the bio-control activity of a collection of fungal species isolated from soybean production fields. The ultimate goal is to use potential bio-control agents to improve the management of soybean diseases caused by pathogens present in the soil such as Fusarium spp., Phytophthora sojae, and Pythium spp. This could be achieved either by introducing these bio-control agents to soybean production fields, and/or by fine-tuning existing management practices to enhance the prevalence and activity of bio-control agents native to production fields. Our specific objectives are:Objective 1.Test the effect of a set of recently identified potential bio-control agents on soil-inhabiting fungal, oomycete, and nematode pathogens of soybeanObjective 2.Assess potential roles of these agents in eliciting defense mechanisms in soybean plants (activity planned for years 2&3 of the project)Objective 3.Test the effect of fungicidal seed treatments on these organismsObjective 4.Follow the effect of commonly used management practices on the distribution and activity of these organisms in the soil (activity planned for years 2&3 of the project)
Program Descriptions (11) through (14)	(11) Project Title: Developing an Integrated Management and Communication Plan for Soybean Sudden Death SyndromePrinciple Investigator: Daren Mueller, dsmuelle@iastate.eduBudget Amount and Project Year: $164,811, year 2 of project October 1 March 31, 2015Brief Statement of Objectives:The foundational management strategy for sudden death syndrome (SDS) is using resistant cultivars. However, in years such as 2010 and 2014, when environmental conditions are favorable for disease development, it is evident that resistance alone does not provide adequate control or reduce farmer risk sufficiently. Also, SDS continues to move into new areas. Thus, the main goal of this project is to investigate management options that will help ensure resistant cultivars will be as effective as possible thereby reducing risk as well as providing farmers with maximum economic return on their investment even in unusually conducive SDS conditions. Objective 1. Evaluate if soybean root health can be improved to reduce SDS or be used as an indicator of SDS risk.Objective 2. Determine how shifts in soybean production practices affect the risk of SDS development.Objective 3. Communicate research results with farmers, agribusinesses.Examined the effect of glyphosate on SDS. Study has been published in Plant Disease. Study of effect of interaction between herbicide and seed treatment on SDS is ongoing. We collected and analyzed the first year data. Completed a multi-lab study evaluating performance of six qPCR assays developed for F. virguliforme. The manuscript was submitted for publication to Phytopathology. In this study, we compared the strengths and weakness of all six assays under different research facilities in terms of their specificity, sensitivity, and consistency and also identified an effective protocol for better diagnosis and quantify SDS pathogen. To summarize, assays differed in their performances and also the performance of the same assay varied among the laboratories. An assay developed in Chilvers lab showed the highest sensitivity and the second highest specificity, and thus is suggested as the most useful qPCR assay for F. virguliforme. This assay is currently being used for quantifying F. virguliforme population in root and soil in other objectives. Identified seed treatments to reduce SDS foliar symptoms. We completed a study evaluating planting date and seed treatment effect on SDS development. Manuscripts are being written to peer-reviewed journals. To summarize, ILeVO seed treatment reduced disease severity and increased yield nearly in all plantings and cultivars, with a maximum yield response up to 21% (Roland Iowa). Effect of planting date on foliar SDS symptoms was inconclusive. Although Mid-June plantings did not have higher disease than early plantings it yielded lower grain up to 19 bu/A compared to early May plantings.Evaluated different fungicide products and application methods to see if any would complement cultivar resistance Manuscript is being written for publication in peer-reviewed journal. We are continuing this study in 2015 replacing some products and foliar applications with new chemical and biological products. From this study, the main conclusion was that ILeVO seed treatment and Luna Privilege in-furrow were effective at reducing SDS severity in many different environments compared to the control. Foliar applications of any chemicals had no effect on SDS. Collected SCN, SDS and yield data from all participating states and data analysis is being done. We will continue this experiment in 2015 as well. However, so far we found varieties with Peking source of resistance for SCN had lowest SDS in many environments and varieties with no resistance to SDS and SCN had the highest disease. Presented our preliminary research at professional meetings, on Plant Management Network, gave national and international seminars, media interviews, talk in field days and conferences for farmers and also published in state newsletter articles, 20+ media releases etc. To communicate with researchers, we also published or are in the process of publishing in peer-reviewed journals. We also had several press releases, including some jointly with NCSRP, based on results from this project (e.g., glyphosate study, ILeVO study).(12) Project Title: Accelerating soybean yield improvement by utilizing yield genes from soybean wild relativesPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: Randall Nelson (PI), USDA-ARS, University of Illinois, Jianxin Ma, Purdue University, Matthew Hudson, Patrick Brown and Brian Diers, University of Illinois, Ram Singh, USDA-ARS, Urbana; George Graef, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.Budget Amount and Project Year: $187,387, 2014Brief Statement of Objectives (max 250 words):Our objective is to identify and genetically characterize high-yielding lines derived from the wild relatives of soybean that can be used to infuse unique and highly productive yield genes into new soybean varieties. We have three sub-objectives that will help us achieve this goal. First, using the highest yielding experimental lines derived from crossing Dwight by PI 441001 (G. tomentella), we will genetically map the location of the genes/chromosomal regions responsible for these large yield increases. Secondly, using large populations of the inbred lines derived from crosses of the soybean variety, Williams 82, with the wild soybean accessions PI 483916 and PI 479752, we will precisely map agronomically important genes associated with the major differences between soybean and wild soybean. Finally, we will yield test experimental lines derived from up to eight wild soybean accessions and identify chromosomal regions from the wild soybean parent that are adjacent to (but do not contain) the genes that condition the wild soybean plant type. This will put a priority on identifying those positive genes from wild soybean that were most likely left behind during domestication and will not have been previously used in developing soybean varieties for the North Central region.(13) Project Title: Enhancing soybean yield by genetic improvement of seed number per plant, seed germination and seedling emergence potential under drought conditionsPrincipal Investigator: Sona Pandey, Donald Danforth Plant Science CenterReporting Period: October 1st, 2014 March 30th, 2015 Specific Challenge Addressed: The main objective of this proposal is to evaluate the role and signaling mechanisms of novel, plant-specific G? proteins in seed and pod development and drought/oxidative stress; processes that affect some of the most critical agronomic traits of soybean. This proposal addresses the fundamental challenge of increasing soybean yield under drought conditions by improving seed germination and seedling emergence potential as well as increasing the seed and pod number per plant. Research Goals and Specific Objectives: Our preliminary data show that G-proteins are involved in regulation of processes that directly affect soybean yield: control of seed number and size, nodulation and abiotic stress responses. The goal of this proposal is to evaluate these important traits in transgenic soybean and underlying signaling mechanisms of G-proteins that will help identify the basis for enhanced productivity and reduced yield losses caused by environmental stresses, two of the broad research areas identified by NCSRP. We have identified the following specific objectives to achieve our goals: Objective 1. Generation of transgenic soybean plants over-expressing group III G? using tissue-specific promoters and analysis of its effect on overall yield and drought toleranceObjective 2. Identification of additional effectors of group III G? family genes by genomics-based approaches for future targeted manipulations(14) Project Title: Identifying Producer Priorities for Soybean Insect Pest Management in the North Central Region Principle Investigator and Co-PIs: Project Director: Kelley Tilmon, South Dakota State University Co-PIs: Erin Hodgson and Thelma Heidel-Baker, Iowa State UniversityBudget Amount and Project Year: Project year: 1 of 1Budget: $25,000Reporting Period: October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015Brief Statement of Objectives:The purpose of this project is to identify soybean producers priorities and needs for future research and outreach on insect pest management in the North Central Region, and to provide outreach information in response to these needs. Producer feedback is a critical component to define research and determine its future direction, to ensure that checkoff funds are invested where they are most needed. Specific objectives were:Conduct a workshop to bring soybean producers and scientists together to share research results and asses future research needs for soybean insect pest management in the North Central RegionConduct additional information-gathering to assess future research needsOrganize a capstone outreach event for soybean producers and other agricultural
Program Descriptions (15) through (19)	(15) Project Title: Quantification of viral suppression in SCN populations: nematode virus impact on SCN reproduction and egg viabilityPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: Gregory L. Tylka, Iowa State University (PI), Kaustubh Bhalerao and Sadia Bekal, University of Illinois (Co-PIs)Budget Amount and Project Year: $55,000 March 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015 (Year 1) $55,000 October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016 (Year 2)Brief Statement of Objectives:Heterodera glycines, the soybean cyst nematode (SCN), is the most damaging pathogen of soybean in the North Central Region of the USA. This nematode is particularly problematic because eggs survive in the soil for many years, making this pathogen very difficult to manage. A management strategy that would limit SCN egg hatching would be an effective way to disrupt a critical point in the nematode life cycle. Commonly used nematicides, resistant soybean varieties, and nonhost crops do not kill nematode eggs, but newly discovered SCN viruses reproduce in nematode eggs and lower their viability. The overall goal of this project is to quantify the extent of damage viruses inflict on SCN in laboratory and field experiments, with the hope that these viruses may be deployed as self-replicating, SCN-specific biological pesticides in the future. Specific project objectives are: 1) To quantify the damage to SCN caused by viruses and 2) to determine which viruses cause the most damage to SCN.Brief Statement of Expected Deliverables (max 250 words):Our main goal is to quantify the damage that viruses cause on SCN. We will quantify the damage to SCN in both the field and in laboratory experiments. For the field phase of the project, the first goal will be to identify and locate virus-infected SCN populations. The next step will be to assess the extent of damage to SCN reproduction caused by the viruses. In the laboratory studies, we will utilize inbred SCN populations with differing levels of the viruses or no virus at all. These studies will be ongoing throughout the first year and should establish the level of damage to egg hatch rates and nematode mobility. (16) Project Title: Soybean Aphid Management, Resistance, and Outreach in the North Central RegionBudget Amount and Project Year: Project Year 3 of 3; Budget $693,685Reporting Period: October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015Brief Statement of Objectives:The purpose of this project is research and outreach on the soybean aphid, including management, resistance breeding, genomic studies, biological control, and a dedicated outreach objective. This project combines the multidisciplinary expertise of 24 scientists in 12 states. This research proposal is organized into five Programs, each with associated projects. The programs are listed here, with progress on various project objectives described below:Integrated Pest ManagementBreeding and Genetic Resistance to Soybean AphidSoybean Aphid BiotypesBiological ControlExtension and OutreachBrief Statement of Expected Deliverables during Reporting Periods:Research on aphid biotypes capable of surviving on resistant soybeansAnalyses of the cost-effectiveness of seed treatmentsPesticide resistance monitoring for soybean aphidResearch on the relationship between soil nutrients and aphid outbreaksSoybean introductions screened for aphid resistance (ongoing each year)High yielding aphid resistant germplasm with single or stacked genes adapted to maturity groups I to III (Year 3)Resistant/susceptible isolines for use in researchEstablishment of at least one species of aphid parasitoid species in the North Central region, along with information on its impact on soybean aphidLocal and regional extension deliverables (factsheets, field guides, videos, scouting aids, etc.) Capstone event featuring project resultsUpdated content for the NCSRP soybean research website(17) Project Title: Engineered resistance to soybean cyst nematode via induced gene silencing (RNAi)Principle Investigator and Co-PIs: Harold Trick (Project Leader), Tim Todd and Jiarui Li (Kansas State University), John Finer (The Ohio State University), Wayne Parrott (University of Georgia) and Lila Vodkin and Jack Widholm (University of Illinois); Budget Amount and Project Year: ($168,671)Brief Statement of Objectives: The primary goal of this research project is to establish a new set of biotech traits that have durable resistance to soybean cyst nematode (SCN). Turning off genes by a process known as RNA interference (RNAi) has tremendous potential as a new strategy to increase nematode resistance. Past research with other nematode species has demonstrated the scientific merit of the technique. This project will investigate the opportunities to insert target gene sequences in the SCN that will provide durable genetic materials that will be lethal to SCN populations.The specific objectives of this project are to:Complete the production of stable transgenic soybean plants with traits that can silence specific nematode genes Perform bioassays with the engineered plants to confirm effectiveness of the SCN resistance; and Examine the durability of traits on single and diverse populations of SCN.Brief Statement of Expected Deliverables: It is anticipated this research will result in stable transgenic soybean lines expressing the RNAi constructions and that events with increased levels of SCN resistance will be identified. By the end of the funding cycle we intend to identify specific lines that have broad levels of resistance to several populations or HG types of soybean cyst nematodes. (18) Project Title: Disease Study Group: Focus on New and Emerging Soybean DiseasesPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: Kiersten Wise, Purdue University and Daren Mueller, Iowa State University, Loren Giesler, University of Nebraska, Carl Bradley, University of Illinois, Martin Chilvers, Michigan State University, Albert Tenuta, OMAFRA; Project contributor (no-cost): Damon Smith, University of WisconsinBudget Amount and Project Year: Project period 03/01/13 to 02/28/16; Year 2 of 3Total funding: $222,000 ($74,000 per year for 3 years)Brief Statement of Objectives:This project directly benefits soybean farmers in the North Central region by providing current and timely Extension material to aid in the identification and management of emerging diseases, and diseases lacking Extension information. The project improves awareness and stakeholder knowledge of emerging diseases using traditional mechanisms such as fact sheets and bulletins, as well as new technologies such as web-based videos and web content that are downloadable and viewable through new technology such as smartphones and tablet devices.Project objectives: 1. Provide information on emerging soybean diseases at multiple levels of Extension interface (print, web, video, etc.) to reach diverse groups of stakeholders.2. Create a platform to host and brand Extension material developed in conjunction with the North Central Soybean Research Program to facilitate updates and allow users to identify trusted sources of material through this branding partnership.3. Provide current research summaries on emerging diseases to direct and coordinate future research priorities thereby minimizing duplication, maximizing resources and increasing response time.(19) Project Title: Understanding the role of fungicide programs on soybean health and charcoal rot developmentPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: Kiersten Wise, Purdue University and Daren Mueller, Iowa State University, Emmanuel Byamukama, South Dakota State University, Martin Chilvers, Michigan State University, Chris Little and Doug Jardine, Kansas State University, Damon Smith, University of WisconsinBudget Amount and Project Year: Project period 03/01/14 to 02/28/16; Year 1 of 2Total funding: $241,105 ($120,552 per year for 2 years)Brief Statement of Objectives:Charcoal rot, caused by Macrophomina phaseolina, is a disease of growing importance in the North Central Region, yet current management options are limited. In addition, this disease is more severe when plants are stressed by heat and dry conditions. New fungicide programs and fungicide products are marketed to reduce plant stress, but these products and programs have not been evaluated to determine their impact on charcoal rot development and yield. The goal of this research is to understand under what conditions fungicides may reduce plant stress and yield loss due to charcoal rot so that we may improve our recommendations to farmers interested in using fungicides to mitigate plant stress and/or to manage charcoal rot.Research objectives:1. Determine efficacy of pre-emergence fungicide applications on M. phaseolinacolonization and soybean yield.2. Evaluate various foliar fungicides applied at different times for efficacy against M. phaseolina to determine optimum foliar fungicide use for charcoal rot management.3. Integrate research findings into NCSRP charcoal rot Extension materials
Program Descriptions (6) through (10)	(6) Project Title: Identifying High-yield Genotypes in the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection Principle Investigator and Co-PIs: George Graef, University of Nebraska (ggraef1@unl.edu), Kent Eskridge (Statistics, UNL), Randy Nelson (USDA, ARS, Illinois), Brian Diers (University of Illinois), Danny Singh (Iowa State University), Aaron Lorenz and Jim Orf (University of Minnesota), Andrew Scaboo (University of Missouri). Budget Amount and Project Year: $64,500, Year 1 of 3 Brief Statement of Objectives (max 250 words): The overall objective is to identify the best soybean lines in the USDA collection that will increase soybean yields in the north central region. This research will develop ways to efficiently and effectively sample the over 17,000 introduced soybean accessions and identify the best ones to improve yield and quality in US commercial soybean varieties. Less than 20 PIs make up more than 86% of the parentage of modern US soybean cultivars. Effective use of the other 16,980 accessions becomes a sampling issue. So our approach makes use of the 50K SNP genotype information available on all accessions in the collection to evaluate differences among sampling methods related to genetic diversity, yield, and ability to identify genomic regions related to yield in this vast resource that we have available. We used three sampling methods a super saturated design (SSD), cluster method (CLU) and random selection (RAN) -- to choose PI accessions based on the 50K SNP genotype information. The SSD maximizes differences among all entries in the group, so our expectation is that the lines in the SSD group will have greater genetic variation, and a larger variance for yield and other traits that we measure in our evaluations. The ultimate end goal is to facilitate development of high-yielding soybean cultivars for producers by making efficient use of these genetic resources.(7) Project Title: Characterization and Enhancement of Soybean Genetic Resources for Soilborne Disease ResistancePrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs: (PIs) James Kurle, Xianjin Ma, (Co-PIs) Jim Orf, Nevin Young, Kate Rainey.Amount and Project Year: $186,500 (Year 1 of 3)Brief Statement of Objectives (max 250 words):Obj. 1.Evaluate of soybean germplasm for resistance or partial resistance to Phytophthora sojae, Pythium irregulare, P. ultimum, and Fusarium graminearum (Kurle & Orf)Obj. 2.Identify of QTLs underlying resistance to P. sojae, F. graminearum, P. irregulare, and P. ultimum by association mapping (Kurle & Young)Obj. 3.Fine mapping, isolation, and functional verification of two uncharacterized Rps genes conferring resistance to P. sojae (Ma&Rainey)Obj. 4.Develop highly adapted soybean cultivars or experimental lines with major resistance QTLs and Rps genes by marker-assisted selection (Rainey & Orf)Brief Statement of Expected Deliverables (max 250 words):Obj. 1. Relate new QTLs/genes to resistance and partial resistance to P. sojae, P. ultimum, F. graminearum identified in early maturity lines.Obj. 2. Initial results of statistical analysis and association mapping for P. sojae. Obj. 3. Fine mapping of RpsUN2 to a 64-kb region within 430 kb previously associated with marker for this gene.Obj. 4. Introgression of RpsUN1 and RpsUN2 to elite breeding lines developed by Purdue.(8) Project Title: Development of a rapid SCN virulence testPrinciple Investigator and Co-PIs:Lead PI: Kris Lambert, knlamber@uiuc.eduCo-PI: Khalid Meksem, meksemk@siu.eduCo-PI: Silvia Cianzio, scianzio@iastate.eduBudget Amount and Project Year: $ 64,000 year 1 of 2Brief Statement of Objectives (max 250 words):This project has the aim of developing an inexpensive, quantitative, DNA-based virulence test based upon the use of recently identified nematode virulence genes, that will take only hours to complete. This project has two main goals:1) Identify new SCN resistance gene combinations focusing on soybean resistance conferred by the Rhg4. 2) Test SCN virulence gene candidates for their ability to predict virulence in field SCN populations. Brief Statement of Expected Deliverables (max 250 words):The main deliverable for this project is a diagnostic test to predict the ability of SCN to grow on soybean plants that are considered resistant. We would not expect any one DNA-based test to predict all forms of SCN virulence, so the main output of this project will be a series of independent tests, verified on field populations of SCN, that collectively predict the SCN virulence phenotype. Also, we expect to generate a set of SCN resistant soybean lines with different combinations of SCN resistance genes. The combination of the two outputs will be a SCN virulence test and a set of SCN resistant plants that if used together will constitute a management strategy that will lower SCN populations in the field.(9) Project Title: Micronutrients for Soybean Production: A Position Paper for the North-Central RegionPrincipal Investigator: Antonio P. Mallarino, Iowa State UniversityBudget Amount and Project Year: Year 1, $66,529Brief Statement of Objectives (max 250 words):Soybean growers in the in the North Central region have been asking many questions concerning possible soybean yield loss due to deficiency of micronutrients. However, few extension publications address this issue based on recent research results, and often have divergent recommendations not clearly related to soil differences across states. Therefore, the goal of this multi-state project is to gather information across key states of the North Central regional and prepare a regional position paper on rational use of micronutrients for soybean production. The specific objectives are:1. Find, analyze, and summarize published and unpublished land-grant university field response-based information about soybean need for micronutrients and the value of both soil and plant tissue analyses in the North Central region.2. Prepare and publish a regional position paper addressing the most important issues concerning use of micronutrients for soybean production in the North Central region.(10) Project Title: Iron Deficiency Chlorosis: Getting to the root of the problemInvestigators/institutions: Phil McClean (Project Leader and Robert Stupar (University of Minnesota). The project leaders E-mail is phillip.mcclean@ndsu.edu Projects Strategic Goal is to develop useful molecular markers that can identify IDC efficient genotypes and use state of the art genomic technologies to identify genes involved in IDC efficiency or inefficiency. The ultimate goal of the research is to isolate candidate genes and develop markers for these genes that will aid the soybean breeder in developing IDC resistant varieties.

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 51056K

Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:	14000265
Software Version:	2014v5.0

		Prior Year	Current Year
8	Contributions and grants (Part VIII, line 1h) .........	2,855,813	3,172,734
9	Program service revenue (Part VIII, line 2g) .........		0
10	Investment income (Part VIII, column (A), lines 3, 4, and 7d ) ....	1,359	6,812
11	Other revenue (Part VIII, column (A), lines 5, 6d, 8c, 9c, 10c, and 11e)		0
12	Total revenue—add lines 8 through 11 (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12)...................	2,857,172	3,179,546
13	Grants and similar amounts paid (Part IX, column (A), lines 1–3 )...		0
14	Benefits paid to or for members (Part IX, column (A), line 4).....		0
15	Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits (Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10)		0
16a	Professional fundraising fees (Part IX, column (A), line 11e).....		0
b	Total fundraising expenses (Part IX, column (D), line 25) 0
17	Other expenses (Part IX, column (A), lines 11a–11d, 11f–24e)....	3,253,779	208,208
18	Total expenses. Add lines 13–17 (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25)	3,253,779	208,208
19	Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 18 from line 12.......	-396,607	2,971,338
		Beginning of Current Year	End of Year
20	Total assets (Part X, line 16).............	3,085,290	4,605,452
21	Total liabilities (Part X, line 26).............	2,601,060	1,149,884
22	Net assets or fund balances. Subtract line 21 from line 20.....	484,230	3,455,568

Sign Here

	Signature of officer	Date

	Type or print name and title


4a	(Code: ) (Expenses $ 57,268 including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
	SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT OF PROGRAM SERVICES

4b	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4c	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4d	Other program services (Describe in Schedule O.)
	(Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
4e	Total program service expenses57,268

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)	(C) Position (do not check more than one box, unless person is both an officer and a director/trustee)		(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations
(A) Name and Title
(1) Craig Converse........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(2) RON OHLDE........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(3) CLIFF MULDER........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(4) Keith Kemp........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(5) GENE STOEL........................................................................ Vice President	0.00 .......................0.00	X	X	0	0	0
(6) Greg Peters........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(7) TREVOR GLICK........................................................................ President	0.00 .......................0.00	X	X	0	0	0
(8) CECIL DEMOTT........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(9) ED CAGNEY........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(10) Jerod Hooker........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(11) Rick Albrecht........................................................................ Director	0.00 .......................0.00	X		0	0	0
(12) MIKE CERNY........................................................................ Secretary/Treas	0.00 .......................0.00	X	X	0	0	0

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)	(C) Position (do not check more than one box, unless person is both an officer and a director/trustee)						(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations
(A) Name and Title

1	Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities: COORDINATE SOYBEAN RESEARCH
2	Check this box
3	Number of voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1a) ........	3	12
4	Number of independent voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1b) .....	4	12
5	Total number of individuals employed in calendar year 2014 (Part V, line 2a) ......	5	0
6	Total number of volunteers (estimate if necessary) .............	6	12
7a	Total unrelated business revenue from Part VIII, column (C), line 12 ........	7a	0
b	Net unrelated business taxable income from Form 990-T, line 34 .........	7b

1b	Sub-Total................
c	Total from continuation sheets to Part VII, Section A....
d	Total (add lines 1b and 1c)............

(A) Name and business address	(B) Description of services	(C) Compensation





2 Total number of independent contractors (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization 0

				(A) Total revenue	(B) Related or exempt function revenue	(C) Unrelated business revenue	(D) Revenue excluded from tax under sections 512-514
1a	Federated campaigns..1a
b	Membership dues....1b
c	Fundraising events....1c
d	Related organizations...1d
e	Government grants (contributions)1e

f	All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts not included above1f		3,172,734

g	Noncash contributions included in lines 1a-1f:$
h	Total. Add lines 1a-1f.......			3,172,734
			Business Code
2a
b
c
d
e
f	All other program service revenue .
g	Total. Add lines 2a–2f........			0
3	Investment income (including dividends, interest, and other similar amounts).......			6,812			6,812
4	Income from investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds..			0
5	Royalties...........			0
		(i) Real	(ii) Personal
6a	Gross rents
b	Less: rental expenses
c	Rental income or (loss)
d	Net rental income or (loss).......			0
		(i) Securities	(ii) Other
7a	Gross amount from sales of assets other than inventory
b	Less: cost or other basis and sales expenses
c	Gain or (loss)
d	Net gain or (loss)..........			0
8a	Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ of contributions reported on line 1c). See Part IV, line 18 ..
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from fundraising events..			0
9a	Gross income from gaming activities. See Part IV, line 19 ...
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from gaming activities...			0
10a	Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances .
	a
b	Less: cost of goods sold ..b
c	Net income or (loss) from sales of inventory..			0
Miscellaneous Revenue			Business Code
11a
b
c
d	All other revenue ....
e	Total. Add lines 11a–11d ......			0
12	Total revenue. See Instructions......			3,179,546			6,812

Do not include amounts reported on lines 6b, 7b, 8b, 9b, and 10b of Part VIII.		(A) Total expenses	(B) Program service expenses	(C) Management and general expenses	(D) Fundraising expenses
1	Grants and other assistance to domestic organizations and domestic governments. See Part IV, line 21 ....	0
2	Grants and other assistance to domestic individuals. See Part IV, line 22 ....	0
3	Grants and other assistance to foreign organizations, foreign governments, and foreign individuals. See Part IV, lines 15 and 16 ............	0
4	Benefits paid to or for members ....	0
5	Compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees ....	0
6	Compensation not included above, to disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)) and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) ....	0
7	Other salaries and wages ....	0
8	Pension plan accruals and contributions (include section 401(k) and 403(b) employer contributions) ....	0
9	Other employee benefits .......	0
10	Payroll taxes ...........	0
11	Fees for services (non-employees):
a	Management ......	0
b	Legal .........	0
c	Accounting ...........	0
d	Lobbying ...........	0
e	Professional fundraising services. See Part IV, line 17	0
f	Investment management fees ......	0
g	Other (If line 11g amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 11g expenses on Schedule O) ....	0
12	Advertising and promotion ....	0
13	Office expenses .......	0
14	Information technology ......	0
15	Royalties ..	0
16	Occupancy ...........	0
17	Travel ............	0
18	Payments of travel or entertainment expenses for any federal, state, or local public officials ......	0
19	Conferences, conventions, and meetings ....	0
20	Interest ...........	0
21	Payments to affiliates .......	0
22	Depreciation, depletion, and amortization .....	0
23	Insurance ..............	0
24	Other expenses. Itemize expenses not covered above (List miscellaneous expenses in line 24e. If line 24e amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 24e expenses on Schedule O.)
a	ADMINISTRATIVE	150,940		150,940
b	RESEARCH ACTIVITIES	57,268	57,268
c
d
e	All other expenses	0
25	Total functional expenses. Add lines 1 through 24e	208,208	57,268	150,940	0
26	Joint costs. Complete this line only if the organization reported in column (B) joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation. Check here if following SOP 98-2 (ASC 958-720).


			(A) Beginning of year		(B) End of year
1	Cash–non-interest-bearing .............		300,000	1	2,157,805
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........		1,990,042	2	2,251,560
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........			3	0
4	Accounts receivable, net .............		795,248	4	191,573
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
				5	0
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
				6	0
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............			7	0
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............			8	0
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........			9	0
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b		10c	0
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........			11	0
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....			12	0
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....			13	0
14	Intangible assets ...............			14	0
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........			15	4,514
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......		3,085,290	16	4,605,452
17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........		2,601,060	17	1,149,884
18	Grants payable .................			18
19	Deferred revenue ................			19
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............			20
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..			21
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........			22
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..			23
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....			24
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................			25
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........		2,601,060	26	1,149,884
	Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............		484,230	27	3,455,568
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........			28
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........			29
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........			30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....			31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds			32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........		484,230	33	3,455,568
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........		3,085,290	34	4,605,452