Farming Hope

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832393341
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4155801843
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,803,175
Expenses
$3,531,813
Assets
$4,273,779
Liabilities
$1,862,902

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA SOBREPEA (Executive Dir.): $172,175 total reported compensation
  • HALEY L NIELSEN (DEVELOPMENT DIR.): $139,430 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Farming hope is a culinary job training and food justice nonprofit organization. Farming hope's mission is to empower folks experiencing major barriers to employment to grow and cook food to sustain themselves and their communities. Farming hope runs several programs: 1) the organization provides job training for homeless folks and people with criminal histories, 2) the organization provides meals and groceries for low income families, and 3) the organization seeks to minimize food waste by sourcing food items that are cosmetically imperfect.

What it reported doing in 2025

Farming hope seeks to eliminate food waste by sourcing food items that are cosmetically imperfect. These items are then used as ingredients in the preparation of meals.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.9%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.9% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.