Heat of the Kitchen
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 851343647
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Rating
- 93
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $166,852
- Expenses
- $136,373
- Assets
- $44,156
- Liabilities
- $2,266
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- Alice Cravens (Non Voting Board Member)
- Eric Cuneo (Secretary)
- Rodney Chin (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Heat Of The Kitchens mission is to re-engage and mentor transitional aged youth through the communal acts of cooking eating and serving together.
What it reported doing in 2024
Heat of the Kitchen is part of a cohort working with Catalyst Kitchens and JFF Jobs For The Future that is overseeing a grant from the Department of Labor called America Building Apprenticeships. In this 2 year collaboration ending 5 2026 Heat of the Kitchens role is within the high school environment identifying and utilize strands of curriculum that help increase the success rate for youth in state approved pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.3%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 66.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 148% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 159.5% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 106.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $146K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.