Food Well Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474363668
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4044376233
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,158,266
- Expenses
- $3,262,500
- Assets
- $4,848,943
- Liabilities
- $174,361
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KATHERINE CONNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KATHERINE CONNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $187,568 total reported compensation
- BILL BOLLING (CHAIRMAN AND SENIOR ADVISOR): $91,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Food well alliance provides resources and support to local growers to connect and build healthier communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Food well alliance is a collaborative network of local leaders working together to build thriving community gardens and urban farms across metro atlanta. We support farmers and gardeners and connect people to where their food is grown. Our vision is an equitable, local food ecosystem in whicheveryone can participate and benefit.we accomplish our work through two primary programs: resource center- through our resource center, we provide resources and support that local growers most need- things like volunteers, labor assistance, tools, tractor lending, training, grants and bulk quantities of compost. We directly support 300 community gardens and urban farms in fulton, dekalb, cobb, gwinnett, and clayton counties.city agriculture planning- this program connects growers and communities with city officials to develop plans prioritizing urban agriculture.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.9%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 63rd 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: -3.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.9% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 47 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 45 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.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.