Food Equity Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991165734
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Phone
9182005804
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$204,671
Expenses
$55,708
Assets
$148,963
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIC HALLMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DON ROSE (DIRECTOR)
  • LINDEN THAYER (DIRECTOR)
  • PATRICK MATEER (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Food equity collaborative is working to create a more just and resilient food system in North Carolina through community-based food access programs, nutrition education initiatives, and relationships that support local food producers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Together for good food - during the snap delay in late 2025, fec solicited funds from the community to purchase good bowls from equiti foods to donate to local food pantries. By december 31, 2025, fec had donated 3,995 meals to 7 food pantries in orange, durham, and chatham counties.

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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.5%; rating input score 12
  • Program expense ratio: 45.8%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 72.8%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.67; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.5% of revenue deployed · 45.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.