So All May Eat Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204765519
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7205306853
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,349,640
Expenses
$1,172,874
Assets
$889,916
Liabilities
$191,240

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CARRIE SHORES (EXECUTIVE DI): $93,821 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Creating community through healthy food access to address food insecurity.

What it reported doing in 2025

So all may eat, inc.s current programs include: same caf denver, same caf toledo, same outreach, and the cook to work training and employment program. Same cafs, innovative participation-based restaurants, provide access to healthy food where people can eat with dignity while contributing what they can time, money, or produce to the operation of the cafs. Same outreach programs provide healthy meals through intentional partnerships with community social service agencies and other food justice organizations providing services to people living in food desert neighborhoods, experiencing homelessness, veterans, members of lgbtq communities, hispanic/latinx/african american communities, and persons with disabilities. In 2024, so all may eat inc. Served a total of 51,051 meals across the cafe and outreach programs in denver and toledo. Denver served 15,386 meals in the cafe and 13,275 meals through the outreach program. Toledo served 21,933 meals in the cafe and 457 meals through the outreach program. Through cook to work, sames job-readiness training program, students gain skills related to all aspects of working in a restaurant including working in a kitchen and customer service in the front of house. In 2024, 537 volunteers spent 2,311 training hours in the cook to work program. In addition, 29 people reported that their participation with same cafe led to improved employment toward economic stability for them.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.8%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.1%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.8% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $902K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $94K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.