Ruth's Gleanings

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824277688
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Spartanburg, SC, USA
Phone
8645862840
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$434,396
Expenses
$485,852
Assets
$86,030
Liabilities
$1,798

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TONJA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DELTON VEREEN (PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • DALE LOCKAMY (PRESIDENT)
  • ROB NELSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TONJA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $79,040 total reported compensation
  • JEFF RANDALL (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $41,492 total reported compensation
  • TERRI SMITH (FOODSHARE ADMINISTRATOR): $21,752 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ruth's gleanings empowers people in nutritional poverty by increasing access to fresh, healthy food.

What it reported doing in 2025

Gleaning program is where we bridge the gap between food waste and nutritional poverty by rescuing excess healthy, fresh food and distributing it to partner organizations who serve those in need. This is done at no cost to donors or recipients. Recipients include food pantries, soup kitchens, community centers, churches and mission houses.

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 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 72.9%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -11.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 72.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $354K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.