Madras Community Food Pantry

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831106063
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Madras, OR, USA
Phone
5413251747
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$501,310
Expenses
$266,464
Assets
$576,029
Liabilities
$81,682

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathleen May (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathleen May (Executive Director): $15,850 total reported compensation
  • Les Weidner (Secretary): $13,500 total reported compensation
  • Deborah Lawrence (Operations Manager): $13,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To help people out of poverty by alleviating hunger and food insecurity for those persons living in jefferson county, Oregon and the surrounding area who are at risk.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 the food pantry assisted over 26,250 people. The food pantry is open three days per week and distributes food to those in need. Also, the pantry provides at the free food market salvaged food twice per month. The pantry's goal is to improved the dignity of those we are serving, through our 70 volunteers and partners in the commuinity. Late last year we received a monies for our "home delivery" program. This didn't allow us enough time to spend the money designated for 2025. We'll spend a substantial amount of money for the "home delivery" program in 2026, which will change our reporting priorities for program services. Serivces.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 14
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 13
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.8%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.16; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 58.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7% of revenue deployed · 13.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.