Austin Empty Bowl Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274566800
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5129373490
- Rating
- 42
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $160,828
- Expenses
- $161,808
- Assets
- $5,585
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Edward Triece (President)
- Debra Dixon (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Edward Triece (President)
- Debra Dixon (Vice President)
- Spring Lee (Secretary)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Fight hunger and poor nutrition in central Texas by providing financial support to charitable organizations working to end hunger and food insecuity.
What it reported doing in 2025
Austin Empty Bowl Project is an annual event held before Thanksgiving. Crafts people donate bowls and guests are invited to a simple meal of soup and bread. Donations are accepted and guests are asked to keep a bowl as a reminder of all the empty bowls in the world. Funds raised by the event go to benefit the Central Texas Food Bank and Meals On Wheels Central Texas (see accomplishments noted in lines 28 and 29)
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 7
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 6.7%; rating input score 7
- Program expense ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 7
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 6.7% of revenue deployed · 6.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.