Feed The Hungry

Legal name: Lesea Global Feed the Hungry Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320053249
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
South Bend, Indiana, United States
Phone
(888) 832-6384
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Private Operating Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,362,057
Expenses
$69,311,848
Assets
$18,512,816
Liabilities
$759,800

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEFAN J RADELICH (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEFAN J RADELICH (PRESIDENT & CEO): $257,826 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM LAMAR AUSTIN (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $106,865 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Feed The Hungry is dedicated to feeding the poor and hungry around the world, empowering the church worldwide, and sharing the hope that comes through Jesus Christ. Feed The Hungry has delivered more than $500 million of food and supplies to hungry, hurting people in 92 nations around the globe. FTH_2020_USA_GRAPHICS-ICONS-AI-13.png We also respond with emergency food and relief during disasters like. With the generous provision of nutritionally complete meals specifically formulated for malnourished children by Feed My Starving Children and other organizations, hungry children receive a hot meal prepared daily by our network of volunteers. The guarantee of a daily meal gives these boys and girls a chance to get a primary education while offering them hope for a better, brighter future. And since these meals are delivered through local church partners, the children also receive...

What it reported doing in 2025

In fiscal year 2025, feed the hungry completed the year with 658,430 children participating in its every child every day nutrition and food security program, representing a 5% increase over 2024 program achievements. Orphaned and vulnerable children from 25 developing nations benefited from regular, cooked and dry ration meals through this program. Reports from implementing partners demonstrate the effectiveness of the meal program in reducing the visible effects of undernutrition and malnutrition, increased school enrollments, decreased absenteeism, and improved academic performance across all age groups. In addition to the every child every day program, feed the hungry continued to fulfill its mission of emergency relief through (a) engaging in food security efforts among displaced and refugee populations of sudan, south sudan, ukraine, burkina faso, and afghanistan; (b) developed food security and agriculture projects in northern uganda and kenya; (c) invested in vocational training, job creation and education to assist select members of marginalized communities; (d) shipment of 260 ocean freight containers of food and aid to international program partners; and (e) distribution of 14.8 million pounds of food in the USA through 131 implementing partners across 27 states.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 4.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 91.1% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $258K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $119K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 68 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 66 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.