Teen Feed

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943034862
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, United States
Phone
(206) 522-4366
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$860,369
Expenses
$852,077
Assets
$252,992
Liabilities
$67,549

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS REMBIESA (EXEC DIRECTOR (JUL 2024 TO JAN 2025)): $76,000 total reported compensation
  • JANINE KENNEDY (EXEC DIRECTOR (JAN 2025 TO JUN 2025)): $74,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Teen Feed works with the community to offer support to meet basic needs, build strong relationships, and ally with houseless youth as they meet their future off the streets. With the tremendous support of the community, Teen Feed responds to the most basic needs of houseless and at-risk youth in the following focus areas: healthy meals and lives, youth support coordination, street outreach, and healthcare access. Teen Feed is made up of three integrated programs: the Teen Feed Meal Program, the Street Talk Outreach Program (STOP), and Service Links for Youth (SLY). Healthcare support is an integrated component of all existing programs. Our services have continued nonstop throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Our programs 2,000.

What it reported doing in 2024

Service links youth (sly) - sly is a case management program - for youth resource navigation- designed to help youth who are ready to begin the transition to life off the streets. Sly was developed in 1998 after teen feed became concerned that many homeless and street-involved youth were not comfortable accessing traditional agency-based services. Unlike traditional "case management," sly was designed as a youth-centered support program that affirms the strengths of each participant as they meet self-identified goals. Our support coordinator builds a relationship with each youth to learn what types of resources will help them best succeed. Sly is unique in its focus on meeting youth on the streets and in programs, and it serves a broader range of youth - ages 13 to 25 - than most other programs. During the year ended june 30, 2023, case managers continued to navigate alongside youth toward safe, permanent housing with greater independence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.8%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 66.8% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $575K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.