The Campus Kitchen Project Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 550825492
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2019
- Forms available
- Form 990 2019
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2022340707
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,063
- Expenses
- $530,014
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL F CURTIN JR (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL F CURTIN JR (CEO): $224,013 total reported compensation
- GLENDA COGNEVICH (CFO): $153,820 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To use service as a tool to strengthen bodies by using existing resources to meet hunger and nutritional needs in our community; empower minds by providing leadership and service learning opportunities to students and educational benefits to adults, seniors, children, and families in need; and build communities by fostering a new generation of community-minded adults through resourceful and mutually beneficial partnerships among students, social service agencies, businesses and schools.
What it reported doing in 2019
Founded in 2001, the campus kitchens project is the national program of renowned local nonprofit and social enterprise, dc central kitchen. On 60 plus university and high school campuses across the country, students transform unused food from dining halls, grocery stores, restaurants, and farmers' markets into meals for their community. Because food alone will never end hunger, campus kitchens also develop innovative local solutions that go 'beyond the meal and target hunger's root causes. Running a campus kitchen builds leadership skills, offers entrepreneurial opportunities, and fosters personal and community relationships that students both use today and carry with them into future careers. The organization has dissolved and has ceased its programmatic operations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 4
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6,473.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -35.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -27.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $399K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $224K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2019
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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 2/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.