Three Square
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300396918
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, USA
- Phone
- 7026443663
- Rating
- 92
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Soup Kitchens
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $89,677,759
- Expenses
- $98,896,212
- Assets
- $178,135,585
- Liabilities
- $34,405,853
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BETH MARTINO (PRESIDENT &)
Highest reported compensation
- BETH MARTINO (PRESIDENT &): $360,342 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE BECK (CDO): $316,033 total reported compensation
- TIFANI WALKER (CFO- THRU 05): $251,107 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Three Square's mission is to provide wholesome food to hungry people, while passionately pursuing a hunger free community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Three square's mission is to provide wholesome food to hungry people, while passionately pursuing a hunger free community. Three square serves clark, lincoln, esmeralda, and nye counties in southern Nevada and is a member of the feeding america national network of food banks. During the fiscal year ended june 30, 2025, three square distributed food and grocery products through our agency partners and programs such as the senior hunger program and grocery rescue program. Additionally, three square assisted individuals in receiving food assistance through our snap outreach program. Three square is supported by the community. Our ability to serve southern Nevada today and in the future is made possible by the ongoing and generous support of our donors, partners, and volunteers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $23.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 91.3%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $360K · 30 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.4M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 142 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 122 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 8/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.