Crabtree Farms of Chattanooga Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621760383
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
4234939155
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$536,799
Expenses
$531,945
Assets
$638,290
Liabilities
$5,110

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELONIE SHERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ENDED DEC. 2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • MELONIE SHERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ENDED DEC. 2024)): $55,945 total reported compensation
  • LENA BANKS (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIR.(START DEC. 2024)): $37,056 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Crabtree farms is a community-focused farm & agricultural resource that: grows healthy food for the chattanooga, tn area; educates children & families on the benefits of farms & local food; grows the market for fresh food, supporting the success of local farms; and connects diverse people, nature, and place in a beautiful farm setting.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educating children & families from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds on the practice of sustainable farming & the benefits of local, healthy food. Each year, crabtree farms leads or facilitates over two dozen workshops on a variety of topics for diverse audiences. We reached 878 students in 2024 through field trips, education programs, summer camps, and home school programs. We engage the hands & hearts of over 1,400 volunteers directly involved in the production, marketing, & education of local foods.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 61%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.4% of revenue deployed · 61% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $324K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.