Mobile Loaves & Fishes
Legal name: Mobile Loaves & Fishes Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742956081
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5123287299
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Roman Catholic
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $41,390,399
- Expenses
- $28,440,765
- Assets
- $207,561,162
- Liabilities
- $28,803,930
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALAN GRAHAM (CEO)
- KEVIN SHEPHERD (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ALAN GRAHAM (CEO): $383,744 total reported compensation
- KEVIN SHEPHERD (PRESIDENT): $204,391 total reported compensation
- BRENDA BELTRAN (CVO): $169,319 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide food and clothing and promote dignity to our homeless brothers and sisters in need.
What it reported doing in 2024
Mobile loaves & fishes, inc. ("mlf") is a christian outreach ministry that empowers communities in to a lifestyle of service with the homeless. Mlf's mission is to provide food and clothing, cultivate community and promote dignity to our homeless brothers and sisters in need. Delivering more than a sandwich, mobile loaves & fishes' food truck volunteers hit the streets 7 nights a week, 365 days a year to provide food, clothing, hygiene products and other life-sustaining items to our homesless neighbors. With the support of more than 35,473 volunteers and over 6.5 million meals served, mobile loaves & fishes is the largest prepared feeding program to the homeless and working poor in austin, Texas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.3%; rating input score 62
- Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 31.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.3; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 62.3% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $24.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $384K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $21.2M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.