Pimento Chicken Company
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 992493311
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- China Grove, NC, USA
- Phone
- 7042737476
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Inmate Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,238
- Expenses
- $14,287
- Assets
- $114
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- Susan Stirewalt (Board Chair)
- Brittany Howard (Vice Chair)
- Timothy Justin Stallings (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Pimento Chicken Company's mission is to show Christ's love by building relationships with women and men while incarcerated and assisting them when being released by partnering with other organizations to provide resources for support, employment, and housing. The Pimento Chicken Company's vision is to create a community of individuals that will be able to continue Christ's mission on earth and thrive in not only their personal lives, but help the community around them thrive.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provided the following services to those who are currently incarcerated which includes telephone, tablet time, trust fund, quarterly packages, books and publications and trust fund deposits for canteen purchases
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 64% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 33
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 32.8%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 32.7%; rating input score 33
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 32.8% of revenue deployed · 32.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.