Hoosiers Feeding the Hungry Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452402892
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Garrett, IN, USA
Phone
2602331444
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$389,047
Expenses
$406,146
Assets
$126,885
Liabilities
$3,556

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN TAYLOR (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUZIE JORDAN (EXECUTIVE DI): $82,522 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of hoosiers feeding the hungry is to obtain donations of livestock, deer, and funds to provide processed meat to Indiana food banks, food pantries, and related organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The mission of hoosiers feeding the hungry is to secure donations of livestock, deer, and financial contributions to provide processed meat to Indiana food banks, food pantries, and related organizations. In 2025, 1,532 animals were processed by 49 Indiana meat processors, resulting in 84,676 pounds of frozen ground meat packaged in one-pound portions and distributed through 142 nonprofit agencies across 58 counties. Hoosiers feeding the hungry coordinates two key programs that advance this mission: meat4forks program through this program, the organization accepted donations of 174 hogs, 19 cattle, 195 chickens, 18 lambs, and 8 goats. These animals were processed through a network of qualified Indiana meat processors, yielding 33,813 pounds of finished meat distributed to communities in need across the state. Hunt for hunger program in partnership with the Indiana department of natural resources, law enforcement division, hoosiers feeding the hungry serves as one of three nonprofit partners helping to facilitate this initiative. Hunt for hunger enables hunters to donate legally harvested in Indiana, field-dressed white-tailed deer to a network of participating processors. In 2025, 1,118 deer were donated through this partnership, resulting in 50,863 pounds of finished venison distributed to food banks, pantries, and meal programs throughout Indiana.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.1% of revenue deployed · 66.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $269K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.