Sky High Farm Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810764483
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Pine Plains, NY, USA
Phone
2017884555
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,965,136
Expenses
$2,543,169
Assets
$4,483,666
Liabilities
$282,688

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL COLEN (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH WORKNEH (CO-Exec. Direct): $176,785 total reported compensation
  • JOSHUA BARDFIELD (CO-Exec. Direct): $155,012 total reported compensation
  • JAMES TANT (CFO): $68,679 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Working to increase access to fresh, nutritious, locally produced food while investing in collaborative long-term solutions for food security. Sky High works to close the gap between regenerative farming and food access initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided food pantries and food banks with fresh, locally sourced foods in addition to providing educational programs to the community about sustainable farming.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 45%; rating input score 45; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -29.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.76; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 36 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.