West Virginia Food & Farm Coalition Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462706460
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Charleston, WV, USA
Phone
3049260567
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,868,773
Expenses
$2,081,237
Assets
$-200,959
Liabilities
$-64,447

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sierra Cox (President)
  • Samuel Raymie White (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sean O'Leary (Board member)
  • Alecia Allen (Board member)
  • Melia Thompson (Board member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Develop regional foodsheds and build connections among those foodsheds by growing food and farm business, promoting access to local food, sharing resources, changing agricultural policy, mapping and connecting the local food sector, and telling WVs food and farm story.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rural Grocer Network grew out of a Health Food Financing Gratn. Locally-owned and operated grocery stores have been a cornerstone fo their communities. It is the Coalitions goal that these businesses are sustainable and sucessful and they not onlye feed their comunities but also source locally grown agricultural products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 60% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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

MIXED - 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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22.4%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 20.1%; rating input score 20
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -11.4%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -0.1; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22.4% of revenue deployed · 20.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $419K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.