Great Plains Food Bank

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472229589
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fargo, ND, US
Phone
701-232-6219
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,612,922
Expenses
$36,672,590
Assets
$20,407,215
Liabilities
$565,528

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Sobolik (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Sobolik (CEO): $192,898 total reported compensation
  • Kate Molbert (Chief Operating Officer): $143,556 total reported compensation
  • Marcia Paulson (Chief Philanthropy Officer): $134,984 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Great Plains Food Bank works to end hunger through community partnerships, food recovery, and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

STATEWIDE FOOD RECOVERY AND DISTRIBUTION: The Great Plains Food Bank (GPFB) is the only food bank serving the state of North Dakota and Clay County, Minn. Our mission is Ending Hunger Together. During FY25, the Great Plains Food Bank provided food for 12.7 million meals to 160,348 people struggling with hunger; 37% were children and 15% were seniors. The GPFB partners with hundreds of FOOD DONORS (grocers, manufacturers, growers, retailers, and community food drive partners) who donate food for a variety of reasons (overproduction, packaging mistakes, nearing a freshness date, or grown to donate). This food makes its way to neighbors living with hunger either through GPFB's DIRECT SERVICE PROGRAMS or diverse network of PARTNER AGENCIES. The GPFB serves 196 partner agencies (food pantries, shelters, soup kitchens, and other charitable feeding programs) operating in 101 communities who are on the front lines providing food to our neighbors in need. Our direct service programs allow the GPFB to fill gaps in service and bring food to people in need through a variety of targeted programs. VOLUNTEERS are the backbone of our operation. Their service enables us to distribute food efficiently. Last year 3,438 VOLUNTEERS shared 11,209 hours of time with the GPFB, repackaging bulk items, packing food packages, handing out food, sorting food drive items, and performing administrative tasks. The GPFB is supported by thousands of FINANCIAL DONORS who keep our organization operational. For every $1 donated, the GPFB can distribute food for 2 meals. We rely on COMMUNITY CHAMPIONS in every corner of the state to help us design and implement community-based services that tackle both the immediate hunger needs of our neighbors, and long-term root causes of hunger. And finally, we collaborate with our NEIGHBORS experiencing hunger by regularly seeking their guidance and feedback to improve services, reduce barriers, and adapt programs to better meet their needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 36th 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 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: 9.7%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 85.7% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $34.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 238 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 207 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.

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

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.