The Healthy School Food Collaborative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473360048
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5043221188
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,882,496
Expenses
$19,434,487
Assets
$2,253,600
Liabilities
$18,008

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIONNE GRAHAM (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES GRAHAM JR (EXECUTIVE DI): $150,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The healthy school food collaborative works with the summer food service program (sfsp) and the child and adult care food program (cacfp) to provide free after school and summer meals to low income children 18 and under when school is not in session.

What it reported doing in 2020

The organization works with the summer food service program (sfsp) to provide free meals and snacks to low income children 18 and under when school is not in session. When school is out, these children lose access to school breakfast, lunch, and afterschool meals. The sfsp program is an important resource to many families as it provides these meals for free to these children who might otherwise go hungry. These meals also meet strict nutritional standards, including a balance of fruits, vegetables, grains, proteins and dairy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 79.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 70.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 60.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $19.1M reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.