Grain Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200589878
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Santa Ana, CA, USA
Phone
7145429392
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,829
Expenses
$31,735
Assets
$4,615
Liabilities
$518

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARA MONTAGNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLENE BRADLEY (MEMBER)
  • BROOKE WILLIAMS (MEMBER)
  • EYAL YERUSHALMI (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Charitable and educational activities - to promote unified, healthy, sustainable communities. We pursue our mission through collaborative and empowering urban agriculture and public art programs.

What it reported doing in 2014

Urban agriculture jerome community learning garden, jclg community harvest, restorative justice community compost coalition programs using jclg as urban agriculture headquarters, community members are organized empowered to increase their own access to healthy organic foods, through the connection to resources, garden-based and nutritional education and opportunities for environmental stewardship and leadership development. New and emerging youth and adult leaders are supported to promote personal, social and environmental positive systemic changes toward better health for themselves, their neighborhoods, and the planet. Over 400 food-insecure families regularly participate to grow over 30,000 lbs of fresh, organic fruits and vegetables, by and for each other. Over 5 tons of organic compost were processed and utilized in the jclg and community roots gardens to increase garden yields and to amend previously toxic soils. Three new community gardens were launched in santa ana by residents who participated in our programs

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -34.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 54.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.