The Upcounty Hub Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882381948
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Germantown, MD, USA
Phone
2409121077
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,255,119
Expenses
$2,788,233
Assets
$931,387
Liabilities
$116,276

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Grace R Oven (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Grace R Oven (CEO): $101,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Upcounty Hub has been recognized for its work to fight food insecurity with awards, news features, and distinguished visitors. The Hub was the first county food hub created during the pandemic. The leadership of the hub helped to create 7 more hubs in the county. We are known for building partnerships with other non-profit and private sector organizations to support our food insecurity mission for our upcounty neighbors. Thanks to partnerships with other nonprofit organizations and government agencies, the Hub currently feeds around 1,400 families per week. There are drive-thru food distributions 4 days per week, and walk-in pantry 5 times per month. We also offer case management to connect people with rental/housing assistance, primary care physicians, and other social and healthcare services. In calendar year 2024, the Hub was able to reach 64,907 duplicative households in upper Montgomery County. The Hub can reach members of the community that others have not, particularly undocumented immigrants and refugees, due to the trust that we have established with our clients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 64% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 81.2%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 14.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 38.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.6% of revenue deployed · 81.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $102K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.