Tucson Family Food Project Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 863452842
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Tucson, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 5207208952
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $417,162
- Expenses
- $231,822
- Assets
- $276,768
- Liabilities
- $2,868
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVEN COTA-ROBLES (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVEN COTA-ROBLES (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $65,041 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the tucson family food project is to provide meals for children who are struggling with food insecurity, while teaching them how to cook food for themselves in their own homes.
What it reported doing in 2025
Every week, the tucson family food project delivers meal kits to middle school students in the tucson area. Through engaging youtube videos and easy-to-follow instructions, we equip young people with the confidence and life skills to prepare meals for themselves and their families - skills they will carry with them for a lifetime. During the 2024-25 school year, we produced more than 9,500 meal kits, serving approximately 250 students and their families each week. In the 2025-26 school year, we are reaching 260 families weekly and are on track to produce over 10,000 meal kits - equivalent to at least 40,000 servings of fresh, home-cooked food in a single year. This work is made possible by our dedicated volunteers and the generous use of donated commercial kitchen space. In 2025 alone, volunteers contributed more than 3,600 hours of servicevalued at over $125,000 - helping us produce meal kits for tucson-area families. By leveraging these critical in-kind resources, we are able to keep production costs low while maximizing our impact in the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 43
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 59
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 26th 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: 44.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 72.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 70.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 59.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $137K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.