Battenkill Kitchen Inc Battenkill Kitchen Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341978332
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Salem, NY, USA
Phone
5188547053
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,851
Expenses
$10,090
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES BURD (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLES BURD (PRESIDENT)
  • DOROTHY SCHNEIDER (SECRETARY)
  • BRUCE FERGUSON (VICE PRESIDE)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Battenkill kitchen was formed 1. To provide individuals with education in the safety and packaging of food. 2. To provide a commercial kitchen for individual use and special community events and 3. To provide education in food preparation for individuals, members and the community without pecuniary and financial benefit to members, directors and officers.

What it reported doing in 2013

A lunch & learn program employed the kitchen for approximately thirty days during the summer for children's lunches and learning activities. 40 volunteers attended to roughly 55 children per day. Four classes were offered to the children; cooking banana muffins, cooking with tomatoes (bruschetta), custard cooking class, and healthy snacks (healthy cookies). When the classes were completed a cookbook was put together by the kids, titled "my recipe book and coloring book" bki kids. The cost for materials was 107.00. Thirty days use of the building would cost about 550.71 for total costs of 657.71

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -72.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -33.8% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -58.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.