Fresh Approach

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262438206
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Concord, CA, USA
Phone
9257712990
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nutrition

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,389,179
Expenses
$3,019,528
Assets
$2,142,652
Liabilities
$484,569

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA DE TAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA DE TAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $115,163 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of fresh approach is to create long-term change in local food systems by connecting California communities with healthy food from California farmers and expanding knowledge about food and nutrition.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education programs include the veggierx food as medicine workshops and the east palo alto community garden program. The veggierx program began in 2011, reaching nearly 12,000 bay area residents and distributing over $500,000 in "prescription" vouchers for participants to spend on fruits and vegetables at farmers' markets. In 2024, fresh approach offered veggierx workshops and vouchers in four counties (alameda, contra costa, san mateo, and santa clara) in partnership with healthcare providers and community-based organizations. In the east palo alto community, the east palo alto community garden is a key resource offering urban agriculture initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.3%; rating input score 89; 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.9% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.