Worcester County Food Bank Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043071457
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Shrewsbury, MA, USA
Phone
5088423663
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,583,155
Expenses
$21,647,535
Assets
$24,264,680
Liabilities
$286,689

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEAN MCMURRAY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEAN MCMURRAY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $170,660 total reported compensation
  • SARAH WALKER (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $124,737 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To engage, educate and lead worcester county in creating a hunger free community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Healthy food is a fundamental human right of all people. Worcester county food bank (wcfb) is the region's leading food security organization in collaboration with food donors, financial supporters, and volunteers. Wcfb coordinates the collection and distribution of quality fresh, frozen, and nonperishable food donations to people in need in all 60 communities of worcester county through its network of 108 local partner agencies. In fiscal year 2024, wcfb provided 9.3 million pounds of donated food and grocery product, equivalent to approximately 7.8 million meals, for 149,000 unique (unduplicated) people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 77.9%; rating input score 78; 16th 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; 66th 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: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $282K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 41 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 38 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.