Galvestons Own Farmers Market Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464039301
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Galveston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8328191561
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $751,733
- Expenses
- $660,157
- Assets
- $296,546
- Liabilities
- $9,940
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Casey McAuliffe (Executive Director)
- Kimberly Danesi (Vice President)
- Alicia Cahill (Past President)
- Priscilla Files (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Casey McAuliffe (Executive Director): $72,978 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To connect galveston county residents with their local food economy and improves quality of life by fostering a greater sense of community through access to better health, education, and an active connection to sources of good food, along with the joy of eating.
What it reported doing in 2024
Victory gardens program (vgp): our victory gardens program (vgp) builds and manages vegetable production beds at partnered sites in the community. This program took shape in 2020 as a way to further meet food insecurity needs for our community during the pandemic. In tandem with our ygp gardens, these gardens located in central public sites are designed to provide more vegetable access to households across galveston county as well as provide beautiful havens which empower connection with the outdoors & food for all who pass by. Gofm staff ensures consistent maintenance & abundant harvests at our vgp gardens. In collaboration with our community partners and volunteers, we look forward to growing the vgp family of gardens for years to come!
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 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.
- 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: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 61.1%; rating input score 61
- Program expense ratio: 69.3%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.2%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 61.1% of revenue deployed · 69.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $457K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 29/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.