Worthy Purpose Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871672805
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
8777880742
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Banks, Pantries

Reported finances

Revenue
$507,474
Expenses
$202,000
Assets
$627,360
Liabilities
$179,220

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nadiyah Johnson (CEO FOUNDER)
  • Queen Johnson (Vice President Co-founder)

People named in this filing

  • Nadiyah Johnson (CEO FOUNDER)
  • Queen Johnson (Vice President Co-founder)
  • Jessica Hernandez (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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

At Worthy Purpose Inc. our mission is to alleviate hunger by providing nutritious meals to families seniors and individuals in need. We are dedicated to fostering community well-being through food distribution and compassionate service ensuring that everyone has access to the sustenance they deserve. Through our efforts we aim to uplift those in need and create a stronger healthier community.

What it reported doing in 2023

Worthy Purpose Inc. provides essential food distribution services to families seniors and individuals in need. Our program delivers over 10,000 nutritious meals ensuring that vulnerable members of the community have access to healthy food. We partner with local suppliers and volunteers to efficiently package and deliver meals directly to recipients homes. Our focus is on reaching those who are most in need offering consistent support to alleviate hunger and improve overall well-being. Through our distribution efforts we aim to reduce food insecurity and foster community resilience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.8%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2,537.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.2%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.11; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 77.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 112.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $202K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 43 current checks pass · 8 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.