Harvest of Hope Pantry

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274010250
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
Phone
7203821971
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,518,547
Expenses
$3,209,047
Assets
$3,551,516
Liabilities
$209,938

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHAD MOLTER (Executive Dir.): $140,111 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Harvest of hope pantry's mission is to provide healthy supplemental food to boulder families and individuals in need of food assistance within a safe, welcoming and non-judgemental environment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Harvest of Hope Pantry provides free, supplemental food to individuals and families in need. Shoppers can select the items of their choosing in a grocery store setting. This client-choice model offers dignity and autonomy to people experiencing food insecurity.Harvest of Hope Pantry achieved record-breaking growth in 2025 by distributing 1,221,653 lbs of food, a 20% increase over our previous milestone year. We welcomed 1,737 new neighbors to our facility and saw an overall 43% rise in shoppers. To meet the growing need we launched Saturday hours to accommodate working families and individuals who can't visit us during the week. Recognizing the evolving needs of our community, we took proactive steps to improve accessibility. We introduced 2 additional mobile pantries (the latest is our largest to date) providing food, onsite, to individuals who may have transportation or mobility limitations. Growing our reach from 4 to 6 mobile pantries ensures that more food is more accessible to individuals facing food insecurity. Our commitment to environmental stewardship continues as we recovered 248,000 lbs. of unused food from local retailers, reducing waste and redistributing food to those in need. This is more than double our prior year's total. Harvest of Hope Pantry is proud to be a reliable source of high-quality food while also facilitaing high-yield food recovery methods.These operations were made possible by a dedicated staff and a team of 648 volunteers who ensure that every neighbor was served with dignity and respect. Harvest of Hope Pantry remains a reliable source of nutrition and compassion for the community and our ongoing commitment is clear in our 2025 program service accomplishments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.