Utahns Against Hunger

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870343164
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8013282561
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$331,072
Expenses
$319,261
Assets
$116,007
Liabilities
$26,438

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GINA L CORNIA (EXECUTIVE DI): $87,793 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to increase access to food across Utah through advocacy, outreach, and education. Utahns against hunger is utahs only state-wide anti-hunger non-profit organization working on public policy and advocacy for federal nutrition programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Legislative: uah staff worked during the state legislative session to increase the income guidelines for school lunch, hb 100 food security amendments; it passed and was implemented in the 2025-2026 school year. Uah staff worked to protect and preserve funding for food banks and food pantries throughout the state. Opposed hb 403 snap funds amendments, this bill restricts what snap recipients can purchase with snap benefits coalition work: uah facilitated 6 advocates' meetings with the Utah department of workforce services. Uah facilitated 6 pantry association meetings uah staff facilitated and participated in 12 meetings with the food security council; the executive director is the current chair. Uah staff participated in 12 meetings for get healthy Utah, ghu advocates and works to improve school environments to make them healthier, including increased access to healthy food options. Uah staff worked with a coalition of anti-hunger advocates in bi-monthly meetings discussing challenges and opportunities on the state and federal level to improve policies related to federal nutrition programs. Outreach: uah conducted outreach for snap, double up food bucks, and the senior farmers market nutrition program, assisting over 4,000 people in locating food resources in their community. Uah staff recruited and trained one organization to partner with uah in our snap outreach efforts across the state. Other: presented at 12 conferences/classes

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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

STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $180.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $270K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.