Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942418054
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Fairfield, CA, US
- Phone
- 855-309-3663
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Banks, Pantries
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $157,214,074
- Expenses
- $157,389,300
- Assets
- $42,645,574
- Liabilities
- $7,431,581
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CAITLIN SLY (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DARWIN BOSEN (VP OF OPERATIONS): $207,626 total reported compensation
- KIM CASTENEDA (VP OF DEV/COM): $197,851 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER COSTA (DIR. PEO. & CULTUR): $160,967 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide nutritious food and resources to those in need, and to lead the community in the fight against hunger.
What it reported doing in 2024
Nor/csfp program retail grocery stores in contra costa and solano counties participate in the grocery recovery program, donating millions of pounds of food each year. The food banks food resource developer develops and maintains the food banks relationships with donor groceries, ensuring that donations are optimized through coordinated scheduling and regular communication. Donated food is collected and loaded onto the food banks refrigerated trucks and transported to the warehouse in concord, where it is weighted, logged, and checked for food safety by trained food bank staff and volunteers. Rescued food is then distributed through the food banks 180+ partner agencies. Some of the pick-ups are done directly by food bank partner agencies. Agencies report all pounds collected by category through an online portal called meal connect.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $47.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd 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: 18.6%; rating input score 19; 7th 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: -0.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 17 filed program accomplishments · $152.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $208K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $220K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 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.
- 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.