Freshfarm Markets

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352169859
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023917353
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Farmland Preservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,787,313
Expenses
$11,825,225
Assets
$3,299,103
Liabilities
$937,780

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HUGO MOGOLLON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HUGO MOGOLLON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $158,756 total reported compensation
  • CARON GREMONT (DIRECTOR OF FOOD SYSTEM & INNOVATION): $118,097 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER MAMPARA (DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION): $115,088 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Freshfarm is a Washington, dc-based nonprofit that builds a more equitable, sustainable, and resilient food system in the mid-atlantic region by producing innovative solutions in partnership with local communities and organizations. We create food access, economic development, and thriving communities through hands-on education, farmers markets, and food distribution programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Farmers markets-this program promotes sustainable agriculture and improves food access and equity in the mid-atlantic region. Operating producer-only farmers markets and farm stands create economic opportunities for farmers and local businesses, fuel local economies, serve as place makers and community gathering spots, and provide vital food access points available to all. Freshfarm is the largest network of produceronlyfarmers markets and farm stands in the Washington, d.c. Area. There were 26 and 27 markets and farm stands as at december 31, 2024 and 2023 respectively. The markets host a diverse range of food producers from four states (md, pa, va, and wv) and Washington, d.c., including over 260 farmers, ranchers, and food entrepreneurswho either grow, raise, and/or produce every product that they sell. Freshfarm actively seeks producers using sustainable practices and visits each applicant's production site to verify production methods.

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 86% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 27th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $10.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $116K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 39 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 35 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.