The Souper Bowl of Caring Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

During the 24-25 fiscal year, souper bowl of caring continued to go through a great deal of change based on several factors: our tackle hunger map project success, the opportunity to use our data to impact research projects and the need to expand our program offerings to year-round instead of focusing on a once a year event for our success. Key program successes: 1. Continued investment in our partnership with the nfl alumni to build a strong network of players and grassroots groups who support their local food charities. 2. Strategic planning to include new avenues to find sustainable funding without relying so heavily on individual donations. 3. Opportunities to partner with universities and researchers interested in using emerging technology such as artificial intelligence and machine learning to help solve for challenging societal problems such as food and nutrition insecurity. 4. New interest and growth in our youth volunteer programs where youth are helping to build the robust tackle hunger map database and keep it current. They are also helping to spread the word about the map and its use for those in need of food resources in their local community. Since everything raised by local grassroots groups, such as churches and schools, goes directly to their local charities of choice, the souper bowl of caring is dependent upon sustainable funding from major donors, fundraising events, individual donors, and grants for our daily operations. This continues to be accomplished with a very small staff and volunteers. Because more of our work is of direct service to the community, we are seeing more success this fiscal year than in the past.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 61.6%; rating input score 62
• Program expense ratio: 69%; rating input score 69
• Fundraising efficiency: $5.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: Pass
  • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 41.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings