Second Harvest of the Big Bend
Legal name: America's Second Harvest of the Big Bend Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 592610345
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tallahassee, FL, US
- Phone
- (850) 562-3033
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Banks, Pantries
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $45,601,030
- Expenses
- $41,318,421
- Assets
- $25,276,290
- Liabilities
- $7,616,064
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DANIEL PETRONIO (PRESIDENT)
- MELANIE LEITMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
- MONIQUE ELLSWORTH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- MONIQUE ELLSWORTH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $196,345 total reported compensation
- JAMES MCGOWAN (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $123,001 total reported compensation
- IMMANUEL DHANARAJAN (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $119,292 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Second Harvest of the Big Bend is a 501(c)(3) non-profit recognized by the IRS.
What it reported doing in 2024
America's second harvest of the big bend acquires, stores and distributes more 21 million pounds of food and grocery items annually to the community through partnerships with over 135 agencies. These partner agencies operate food pantries, soup kitchens and residential programs supporting the community at large, with a special emphasis on children and the elderly. We also partner with local restaurants and redistribute prepared and perishable food that would otherwise go to waste. Donations of fresh fruits and vegetables by local, state, regional and national growers and farmers are also redistributed to provide healthy food for the community. Finally, we educate the public about the nature of and solutions to the problems of hunger.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.5%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $37.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 32nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 86.5% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 158 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 70 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.