Kitchen Table Campaigns

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461802969
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027948757
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$788,902
Expenses
$720,942
Assets
$429,839
Liabilities
$32,245

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth A Hitchcock (Executive Director)
  • Laurie Valeriano (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Elizabeth A Hitchcock (Executive Director): $115,757 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Kitchen table campaigns works to improve public health and well-being throughresearch, analysis, public education and advocacy. The focus of the organization is reducing the environmental factors that contribute to chronic disease and disability in millions of american families. The primary strategy is fostering partnerships between community leaders, health professionals, scientists, parents, labor and businesses to promote safer products, materials, and practices.

What it reported doing in 2019

Kitchen table campaign's primary program is safer chemicals, healthy families. The staff of the organization facilitate and lead coalitions of organizations andbusinesses dedicated to improving chemical safety. The organizationconducts analysis of proposals pursuant to the toxic substances control act and proposals to reduce exposures to specific chemicals, and disseminates the analyses to the public, coalition members, stakeholders and policymakers. The organization conducts research into best practices in corporate chemical management along the supply chain and disseminates the results to the public.another aspect of the program is a campaign called mind the store which challenges retailers to improve the management of chemicals in their supply chains. Several retailers have engaged with the campaign to improve their practices, including eliminating certain toxic chemicals from products that they sell.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.6% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $613K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2019
  • 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.

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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.