God's Love We Deliver Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133366846
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122948133
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Meals on Wheels

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$51,613,239
Expenses
$53,046,407
Assets
$75,449,690
Liabilities
$21,666,167

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

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID LUDWIGSON (President & CEO)
  • TERRENCE MECK (Strategy & Growth Officer through (Through 1/25) President & Ceo (As of 01/25))
  • Alissa L Wassung (Executive Director-Food Is Medicine Coalition)
  • KAREN PEARL (Special Advisor to the President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID LUDWIGSON (President & CEO): $378,284 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE APICELLA (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $271,150 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN COVELLO (Chief Philanthropy Officer): $254,061 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

The New York city wine and food festival is highly regarded as the city's premier epicurean experience. The goal of the event is to educate and generate awareness of food as a medicine and of god's love programs. Together with god's love we deliver, the festival will support new yorkers in their greatest time of need by raising awareness and critical fund for those living with life altering illness. Over time, this program has helped in earning god's love over 6 billion media impressions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

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: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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; 77th 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: -2.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $43.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $378K · 42 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.5M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 19 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.