ProduceGood

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472289712
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Encinitas, CA, USA
Phone
7604923467
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,524,069
Expenses
$1,411,242
Assets
$754,536
Liabilities
$55,651

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alexandra White (Executive Director)
  • Claire Traubee (President Emeritus)
  • Navjyot Parmar (Vice President)
  • Ronald Eng (President)
  • Stacey Lund (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Alexandra White (Executive Director): $105,251 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Build an active and engaged community committed to finding sustainable solutions that alleviate hunger, reclaim and repurpose food waste, and promote the overall health and well-being of all.

What it reported doing in 2025

The CropSwap residential produce recovery program gleaned/rescued 212,920 pounds of mixed fruit. This fruit, donated by hundreds of backyard growers and orchard owners, was supplied to feeding organizations for distribution to the 1 in 4 struggling with hunger in San Diego County.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% 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.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.4%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • 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: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.