Carnation Farms

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813414267
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Carnation, WA, USA
Phone
4258443100
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Camps

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,164,385
Expenses
$4,258,720
Assets
$3,205,057
Liabilities
$656,783

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Evangemine Liwag (Fin. Controller): $157,533 total reported compensation
  • Paul Shoemaker (Executive Dir.): $143,248 total reported compensation
  • Eric Popp (AG Director): $106,967 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Carnation Farms is a community-based hub for regenerative food and agriculture that educates and empowers the work of culinary & food and farming professionals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Agriculture- Carnation Farms regenerative and sustainable agriculture activities include 400 acres of certified organic vegetable, fruit, hay, and livestock production for sale and use in educational programs. The Carnation Farmstand welcomes over 10,000 visitors annually, selling farm products to the community and offering a marketplace for other local farmers. Products are also distributed to restaurants, caterers, and hunger-relief organizations, advancing our mission of promoting regenerative agriculture, local food access, and community engagement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.4%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 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: 17.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.4% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $103K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.