Lever Foundation
Legal name: Lever Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 823445472
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lancaster, PA, US
- Phone
- +1 (717) 584-1805
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,255,256
- Expenses
- $2,127,072
- Assets
- $3,045,993
- Liabilities
- $2,892
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Kai Yi Carrie Chan (Director)
- Nick Cooney (Director)
- Brian Ottens (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Lever Foundation works to create a more sustainable and humane food system by partnering with corporations, producers, and the public to shift toward plant-based and cage-free sourcing in Asia.
What it reported doing in 2024
Lever Foundation maintains a grant program in which restricted donations made to the Foundation are granted to entities in other countries doing work to advance sustainable, humane and healthy food systems. In 2024, Lever Foundation received restricted grants totaling $1,133,000 to provide grant funding to a charitable entity in Ireland that shares the charitable mission of Lever Foundation in carrying out work to promote sustainable, humane and healthy food systems.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 95
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 85
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: $209.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 5.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.43; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 94% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.