Food Bank For New York City
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133179546
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bronx, NY, United States
- Phone
- 212.566.7855
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Nonprofit Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $173,505,104
- Expenses
- $175,667,473
- Assets
- $75,007,272
- Liabilities
- $36,127,833
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LESLIE GORDON (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- LESLIE GORDON (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $464,234 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW HONEYCUTT (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $345,187 total reported compensation
- ROBERT SILVIA (CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER): $315,152 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Empower Every New Yorker to Achieve Food Security For Good. A full life starts with a full plate—but food alone isn’t enough.** That’s why we go beyond meals, providing SNAP benefits assistance and nutrition education to build long-term stability. Together with nearly 800 community partners, we deliver not just food, but the support New Yorkers need to move past hunger toward self-sufficiency. Because we don’t just serve New Yorkers facing food insecurity—we inspire a city where everyone has a role in ending it. Whether you’re here to receive support or ready to give it, to speak out, or to lend a hand—there’s a place for you in our mission. Our Vision.
What it reported doing in 2024
Fbnyc provides workshops to inform and educate low-income new yorkers and community-based organizations on government food assistance programs and provide access to resources to help communities move toward more sustainable strategies for combatting food insecurity. Food bank for nyc conducts snap training and provides technical assistance on eligibility screenings for community-based organizations and provides also provides direct client services as well. In fy25, food bank for nyc provided services that resulted in over 10,100 enrollments for snap benefits, 8% higher than the previous year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.5%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 4th 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: 92.4%; rating input score 92; 25th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 89.5% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $155M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $464K · 26 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 454 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 398 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.