Valley Meals and More

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853763556
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Glenwood Springs, CO, USA
Phone
9704041193
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Meals on Wheels

Reported finances

Revenue
$570,243
Expenses
$503,781
Assets
$161,037
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIANNE ACKERMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • JIM KENNEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY KENYON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY KENYON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $68,083 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Valley meals and more is addressing food insecurity, loneliness and social isolation of older adults in our community. To enhance the wellness of older adults in the region by providing access to nutritious daily meals, connection to community members, and access to support services, to allow older residents to age in place, safely, independently and with dignity.

What it reported doing in 2025

Valley meals and more continues to address a critical gap in older adult nutrition services and serves as the primary provider of home-delivered, ready-to-eat meals in eastern garfield county for residents age 60 and older who lack the physical or financial ability to prepare balanced meals. Meals are delivered four days per week, year-round, including holidays. In 2025, the program delivered 26,455 meals over 208 delivery days to 243 older adults, at an average cost of $10.25 per meal. Each day, more than 70 dedicated volunteers travel rural routes to serve approximately 125 individuals, providing not only nutritious meals but also regular social interaction and wellness checks. For many recipients who live alone, are geographically isolated, or no longer drive, valley meals offers a vital connection to community and support that helps them maintain independence and well-being.

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 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 78th 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; 64th 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: 11.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $495K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.