After the Harvest

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465385534
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8169211903
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,251,838
Expenses
$2,659,222
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Watson (Executive Director)
  • Bradford Warner (President)
  • Randall Burdge (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Watson (Executive Director): $118,306 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

After the Harvest (ATH) rescues nutritious fruits and vegetables from going to waste and donates them to agencies that serve hungry people, primarily in greater Kansas City. Our volunteers glean After the Harvest, picking what's left in farmer's fields and picking up already harvested leftover produce at farmer's markets, farm stands and produce distributions hubs in our region. Harvesters-The Community Food Network is our largest produce distribution partner, and ATH is Harvesters' largest local produce donor.

What it reported doing in 2024

After the Harvest, a Kansas City-based non-profit, accomplished the mission of reducing food waste and fighting hunger by rescuing surplus produce and distributing it to those in need. Key accomplishments include rescuing millions of pounds of fresh produce, providing millions of meals, and reducing carbon emissions by keeping food out of landfills. Rescued and redistributed produced. The organization's main work was gleaning, or picking, leftover produce from fields, and collecting surplus from farmers' markets and other sources. Fought food insecurity by donating rescued food to agencies like Harvesters The Community Food Network, which then distributed it to food pantries, shelters, and soup kitchens across the Greater Kansas City area. Provided a significant number of meals: Since 2014, the organization rescued over 32 million pounds of produce, which translated to providing 26 million meals. Reduced environmental impact: By diverting produce from landfills, the effort helped reduce methane emissions, equivalent to taking hundreds of cars off the road for a year. Transitioned its mission: At the end of 2024, After the Harvest officially dissolved, and its mission is now being carried on by partner organizations

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.8% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $118K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.