Bountiful Cities Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 050587434
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Asheville, NC, USA
- Phone
- 8282574000
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Garden Club, Horticultural Program
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $529,623
- Expenses
- $393,662
- Assets
- $921,115
- Liabilities
- $11,016
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Darcel Eddins (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Darcel Eddins (Executive Director): $34,320 total reported compensation
- Sekou Coleman (Co-Chair): $4,408 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bountiful Cities is the urban agriculture resource in Asheville. We share and support agriculture resources and skills centered in equity, inclusion and economic viability. Bountiful Cities works collaboratively investing in re-development of local food systems and envisioning abundant and food sovereign communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
FEAST (K-8) public school program reaches 1,600 students each year in Buncombe and Madison Counties, teaching essential gardening and cooking skills. At our partner schools-where an average of 66% of students qualify for free or reduced- price lunch-we manage school gardens that function as both educational spaces and vital food hubs. These gardens serve historically marginalized communities that often lack accessible sources of fresh produce within walking distance. The FEAST program held over 600 hands-on cooking and gardening classes for students, facilitated more than 200 hours of volunteer work, and maintained five thriving school gardens. We organized 48 Garden and Gather workdays, hosted seven successful plant sale fundraisers, and distributed over 2,000 plants to community gardens and schools. In total, we helped distribute more than 10,000 pounds of fresh, locally grown food to individuals and families across our service area.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.9%; rating input score 61
- Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $20.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.34; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.9% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $322K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.