Rolling Tomato

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833922470
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Boise, ID, USA
Phone
2089227879
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,009,005
Expenses
$988,040
Assets
$102,230
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie D'Agostino (Executive Director)
  • John Segar (Treasurer & President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie D'Agostino (Executive Director): $26,825 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We recover excess foods destined for the landfill, and distribute them to our partner recipient organizations for the people they serve.

What it reported doing in 2025

Rolling Tomato is a food recovery service (501c3) that partners with 35+ food recipient sites that utilize the food we deliver to the people they serve. Some examples include: shelters, school resource rooms, senior centers, and many food banks. Our business model is to pick up and deliver immediately to the recipients so that we can provide fresh produce and freshly prepared foods. On average in 2025, we distributed over 7,000lbs each week. We prioritize quality, nutritious food with 85% of food recovered by the organization being fresh produce.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 99.3%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2,771.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.1%; rating input score 81; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 165.6% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 99.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $981K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.