Feeding Charlotte Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843548764
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7046549667
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,260,631
Expenses
$1,221,287
Assets
$188,823
Liabilities
$3,108

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Rich Armenia (Executive Dir.): $68,125 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Feeding Charlotte rescues surplus, freshly prepared meals to reduce food waste and feed the hungry. We believe no food should be wasted while people go hungry in our community. To make this possible, we pickup unused, excess freshly prepared foods from institutions, dining halls, and caterers (that would otherwise be thrown in the trash) and redirect to nonprofits that feed the hungry.

What it reported doing in 2024

Food Rescue Program: With 40% of all food produced in the US ending up in a landfill and 17 million food insecure individuals, both the opportunity and the need are great. Feeding Charlotte combats this issue with our Food Rescue Program, which partners with professional kitchens to rescue their surplus, prepared meals. We have a dedicated team of volunteers who pick that food up and deliver it to established community feeding programs, where the meals get distributed to those who need it most. These recipient feeding programs have established roots in the communities they're serving and generally work under these models: Soup kitchens and general feeding programs, afterschool programs and summer camp programs for children in underserved communities, transitional housing facilities for people experiencing homeless or coming out of incarceration, underfunded senior living facilities, medical rehabilitation centers for people experiencing homelessness, and refugee housing communities and programs. The logistics for the program are tracked and managed through innovative software that connects food donors to recipient feeding programs, volunteers to food runs and shares information to all three pieces of the process through an intuitive app. This system also tracks KPIs and data from all food runs and accumulates impact reports throughout the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 104.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 56.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.