The Branch of Nashville
Legal name: The Branch of Nashville Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 463153789
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016
- Location
- Antioch, TN, United States
- Phone
- 6157525941
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,891,146
- Expenses
- $3,060,714
- Assets
- $1,778,702
- Liabilities
- $250,685
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MELISSA THOMAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA THOMAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $76,725 total reported compensation
- MELANIE BAKER (CFO): $64,626 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Branch of Nashville strives to build a community where everyone can thrive by nourishing, educating, and equipping our neighbors. Because our faith propels us to love God and love our neighbors as we love ourselves, we are dedicated to listening well to our neighbors needs and walking with them on their journey to holistic well-being.
What it reported doing in 2025
The food pantry is open for food pickup four days per week. Food is always free of charge to anyone with need. Registration is completed online from our website and an appointment scheduled for drive up service. Each household can receive food one time per month with an appointment but can receive one emergency box of food per month without an appointment. 126 appointments are scheduled per week with slots fully booked three weeks in advance. Older adults age 60+ do not need an appointment to get food each wednesday. On average, 165 older adults are served on wednesdays. The branch is a community partner for second harvest of middle Tennessee, facilitating access to food for those who experience food insecurity. The food distributed is largely donated by second harvest, one generation away, area retail stores, churches and individuals. The branch distributed 15,344 carts of food totaling 1,253,624 lbs of food to 16,807 unique people in 2025. The pantry is staffed with three full-time, one part-time employees, and approximately 3,000 volunteers donating over 22,000 hours.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.5%; rating input score 73
- Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $81.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 42nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 21.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 25.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 26.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd 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: 72.5% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.