One Nation Dream Makers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 822267805
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2021
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021
- Location
- Livermore, CA, US
- Phone
- (510) 205-0484
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $505,005
- Expenses
- $487,549
- Assets
- $72,848
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RONALD A FORBES (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- RONALD A FORBES (Executive Director): $93,192 total reported compensation
- THOMAS FORBES (Director of Finance): $81,536 total reported compensation
- SANDEE MUNROE (Director of Operations): $7,462 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To wage war against hunger by providing a last mile delivery service bringing healthy food to people in need.
What it reported doing in 2021
Recover and Provide food to those individual and families in need.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 37
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $488K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.