Vinegar Hill Food Pantry Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 873179766
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9084035755
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Banks, Pantries
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,747
- Expenses
- $53,447
- Assets
- $38,536
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jennifer Macksoud (President)
People named in this filing
- Jennifer Macksoud (President)
- Elizabeth Frank (VP Operations)
- Carina Liebeknecht (VP Development)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Feeding people who are experiencing food insecurity in or near the Vinegar Hill neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York. Specifically by providing community members with access to free food through a 24/7 community-stocked pantry and regular distribution events; raising awareness of hyper-local food insecurity while making helping feel more accessible for community members and local businesses; strengthening the community by fostering a culture of neighbors helping neighbors, and helping to mitigate food waste by connecting excess food with those in need.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided ~25K meals to ~1,100 individuals through weekly distribution day (53 times in 2024). Filled the 24/7 Little Red Box ~ 2-3 x a week over the course of the year. Participated in / organized ~1-2 community awareness events per quarter.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 33%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $52K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.