Porch-Hillsborough

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464965398
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Hillsborough, NC, USA
Phone
2486721129
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Reported finances

Revenue
$985,762
Expenses
$811,624
Assets
$237,128
Liabilities
$1,297

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Nora Dicker (Program Manager): $55,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Hunger relief

What it reported doing in 2025

PORCH Food Distributions

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 17.7%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $726K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.