Food Security for America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300720156
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Smyrna, GA, USA
Phone
7623208584
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$577,040
Expenses
$608,250
Assets
$219,047
Liabilities
$8,434

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nancy Yarnell (President/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mercy McDaniel (Executive Manager): $52,754 total reported compensation
  • Nancy Yarnell (President/CEO): $49,308 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Creating communities across America to equip those in need of healthy fresh food.

What it reported doing in 2024

FSA operates Food Security Groups at sponsor sites so that low-income families have enough food, learn about healthy lifestyles, form up- lifting community, and have opportunity for spiritual expression. From July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 FSA distributed 200,054 pounds of food with a retail value of $388,804. We now serve in Cobb, Richmond and Carroll Counties. Unduplicated counts: 238 families meeting bi-weekly; people in those families, 548; of those people, 225 (41%) children. 182 community building meetings. Including our Hurricane Helene response, we served a total of 1,143 people during this fiscal year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.
  • 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.1% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $537K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.