Ecumenical Hunger Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942476942
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
East Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6503237781
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,107,064
Expenses
$8,334,090
Assets
$10,657,202
Liabilities
$306,945

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Lesia Preston (Executive Dir.): $276,480 total reported compensation
  • LaKesha Preston-roberts (Associate Director): $220,103 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

EHPs mission is to provide compassionate, dignified and practical assistance to families and individuals experiencing economic and personal hardship. We offer material help, support services, and advocacy for our neighbors in need, in a challenging and rapidly changing environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program #3: Children's Resources encompasses a number of programs designed to nourish and enrich the lives of low-income children. Serving approximately 4,500 children, EHP provides school supplies (Back To School Program), snack bags (additional food resources to tide children over between meals), Birthday parties, Cake4Kids and Holiday celebrations (e.g., Easter Egg hunt & baskets filled with treats, Halloween Fun Day) and teen holiday shopping trips.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $112.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $276K · 11 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.