Dig In Yancey Community Garden

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273078971
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Burnsville, NC, USA
Phone
8285360414
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$267,569
Expenses
$187,109
Assets
$345,281
Liabilities
$4,205

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kavita Hardy (Executive Director)
  • Erika Schneider (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kavita Hardy (Executive Director): $47,178 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To build and maintain a community garden that feeds Yancey County and empowers people to grow their own healthy foods.

What it reported doing in 2025

Garden that Gives: Dig In! Community Garden grew food at our one-acre organic garden with our staff and 150 volunteers. All of the produce was donated to distribution programs addressing food insecurity in Yancey County. In 2025, over 7,000 pounds of produce were harvested and shared. Dig In prioritizes growing crops that are nutritionally dense, culturally appropriate, and suited to the Southern Appalachian Mountain climate. We also supported 5 smaller, independent community gardens in Yancey County, NC that share food among their members, with food pantries, or neighbors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.1%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.85; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.1% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $143K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $47K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.