Spokane Edible Tree Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473428509
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Spokane, WA, USA
Phone
5096553444
Rating
96
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,159
Expenses
$77,294
Assets
$23,191
Liabilities
$682

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENDAN FINCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ELI DIETZ (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DANTE JESTER (PRESIDENT)
  • PRANAV NAWANI (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHELLE TOWNSHEND (BOARD MEMBER)
  • KRYSTYL MIYAMOTO (BOARD MEMBER)
  • BRENDAN FINCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Spokane edible tree project empowers our neighbors to share in the harvest and care of existing fruit and nut trees by implementing food recovery methods and cultivating a connection with the greater needs in the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Help to alleviate hunger and food waste in the greater spokane area through programs, education, and farmers market recovery.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 74.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $77K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.