Emergency Food Network of Tacoma and Pierce County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943131776
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Tacoma, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2535841040
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,412,327
- Expenses
- $37,754,458
- Assets
- $18,904,465
- Liabilities
- $155,458
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELLE DOUGLAS (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELLE DOUGLAS (CEO): $201,894 total reported compensation
- ROGELIO CORTES JR (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $144,191 total reported compensation
- LIANNA OLDS (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $131,037 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Providing pierce county, wa with a consistent and nutritious food supply, so that no person goes hungry.
What it reported doing in 2025
Emergency food network "efn" distributed 18,274,242 of food to more than 75 partners (food pantries, meal sites, and shelters) in 2025. This was accomplished by purchasing food in bulk, collecting in-kind donations, and managing the disbursement of commodity foods. Efn's network of partner programs served 3,698,035 visits from individuals experiencing food insecurity in pierce county. In addition, efn supplied over 6,000 break bags to students, and delivered 14,000 deliveries through efn's home delivery program.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $61.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 89.5%; rating input score 90; 28th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.6% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $202K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 100 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 60 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.