Growing Healthy Kids

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992329480
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Pleasant Hill, CA, USA
Phone
4156378259
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,068,331
Expenses
$1,014,268
Assets
$215,229
Liabilities
$35,272

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tamara Helfer (President)
  • Eveline Mumenthaler (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Laney Cline King (Ex. Dir to 3/14): $61,734 total reported compensation
  • Seewan Eng (E.D. begin 4/14): $25,667 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The specific purpose of this corporation is to support nature-based education for school-aged children.

What it reported doing in 2024

GHK served Mount Diablo Unified School with integrated programs and pilots across 21 school sites: 19 elementary schools and 9500 students with 12-16 garden, nutrition and wellness lessons and 400 volunteers engaged with tree planting, garden improvements and advanced fruit and vegetable procurement partnerships with 3 ultra-local farms 1 of the 19 elementary school hosted a special program installing a new food forest used for student and community education and as a community source of fresh fruits and vegetables In addition, 1 high school (64 high school students at the Education Academy at Ygnacio Valley High School) In addition, 1 middle school garden which hosted field trips for 900 MDUSD elementary students

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.7% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $869K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.