CalFoods Logistics
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 852138383
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Pleasant Hill, CA, US
- Phone
- (925) 852-6470
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Banks, Pantries
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $37,600,408
- Expenses
- $39,191,692
- Assets
- $42,698,806
- Liabilities
- $1,068,613
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVEN LINKHART (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVEN LINKHART (CEO): $325,758 total reported compensation
- CARRY WARNER (CFO): $244,689 total reported compensation
- CHARISSE ROSS (COO): $217,202 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We are a 501(c)(3) that exists so food banks and other nonprofits can spend less time procuring and more time distributing healthy food boxes to vulnerable individuals and families in cities and rural areas.
What it reported doing in 2024
Tefap is a usda-funded supplemental food program administered by the cdss. Tefap provides administrative funds and usda commodities to a network of food banks throughout California. Typical items are (shelf stable/dry/fresh/frozen/bulk products) milk, produce, eggs, protein. Total pounds: 12,542,014
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 96
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $66.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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: 62.1%; rating input score 62; 13th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -19.5% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $37.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $326K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 63 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 39 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.