Wholesome Wave Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260352899
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bridgeport, CT, USA
Phone
2032261112
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,117,782
Expenses
$2,039,649
Assets
$912,332
Liabilities
$325,471

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENTON LING (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • NATALIA FEINSTEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL 09/2024)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHEL NISCHAN (CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN): $367,599 total reported compensation
  • STACY HICKS HERR (DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS): $162,663 total reported compensation
  • BRENTON LING (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $141,687 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Wholesome wave, inc. Inspires underserved consumers to make healthier food choices by increasing affordable access to fresh, local and regional food.

What it reported doing in 2024

Onekitchen is a wholesome wave initiative built to ensure every chef in america has access to the skills and resources needed to address the most important food systems issues in their communities. From social to environmental impact areas related to food, we support chefs in facilitating national systems change at the local and regional level. Onekitchen organizes, educates, and mobilizes chefs as effective food system changemakers in the communities they call home. Onekitchen achieves this by providing chef members with various tools, trainings, connections, and mentorship opportunities through our national onekitchen network. Chefs are then activated in gathering nonprofit organizations and stakeholders around one table with one vision: to create a better world through food.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 37th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 79.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $368K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.