Second Harvest Food Bank of Middle Tennessee
Legal name: Second Harvest Food Bank of Middle Tn Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 621049447
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Nashville, TN, United States
- Phone
- 615.329.3491
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $156,647,104
- Expenses
- $149,628,993
- Assets
- $88,329,813
- Liabilities
- $10,518,483
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
37 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NANCY KEIL (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- NANCY KEIL (PRESIDENT/CEO): $439,541 total reported compensation
- HEATHER VERBLE (CFO): $249,257 total reported compensation
- KIM MOLNAR END 824 (COO): $187,868 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Nourishing communities. Empowering lives. Second Harvest Food Bank does more than just distribute food, though it is an essential part of our work. We believe in the importance of meeting people where they are, with compassion and acceptance, so they can access the resources they depend on. We build relationships, engage in our community, and advocate for change. Our strategic partnerships with other community organizations help connect our neighbors to additional services that support the whole person. We know a future without food insecurity is possible, and we are working diligently toward it. Learn More A Second Harvest Volunteer.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community food partners - our work includes activities conducted to fulfill second harvest's mission to nourish and empower people in 46 counties across middle and west Tennessee so they can thrive. Specific programs within this category include: partner agencies - second harvest provided nearly 51 million pounds of food during the year ended june 30, 2025 (or more than 42 million meals) to approximately 410 not-for-profit agencies, including food pantries, congregate meal sites, and emergency food programs. These partners work throughout their respective communities to assist food insecure families. Grocery rescue - this program collects perishable and non-perishable food from over 515 retail partners for distribution to partner agencies and program sites. Products rescued and distributed include meat, produce, dairy, bread, bakery items, and dry products. During the year ended june 30, 2025, second harvest picked up directly or facilitated pickup by partner agencies over 14.7 million pounds of food (equivalent to more than 12.2 million meals).snap outreach - second harvest offers snap outreach through our neighbor care pantries, mobile pantry distributions, and partner agencies. Snap, previously known as food stamps, assists low-income individuals and families by providing monthly assistance to purchase food. Second harvest's client outreach staff share information about the nutrition benefits of snap, pre-screen participants, and help individuals complete the snap application. Outreach staff assisted in completing approximately 1,544 applications during the year ended june 30, 2025.manufacturing - second harvest operates a cook/chill operation, which is a method of food manufacturing and shelf-life extension that involves heating food, pumping the product into form-fill plastic bags that are heat sealed, then super cooled for approximately 45 minutes prior to freezing the product. For the year ended june 30, 2025 this program utilized more than 162,000 pounds of donated ingredients that would have otherwise been wasted. Additionally, this operation produces tray pack meals for children's feeding, senior nutrition and partner agencies that do direct home distribution to clients in need.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 21st 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $143.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $440K · 37 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.6M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 293 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 180 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.