The Campaign Against Hunger Inc

Brooklyn, NY · EIN 200934854 · Family Services · IRS code P40

Can receive a giftListed without being asked

Their finances

from their own IRS Form 990, fiscal year 2025
Total revenue
$24M
$24,422,092
From donations
100%
$24M of revenue
Highest reported salary
$300K
DR MELONY SAMUELS
Spending breakdown — and why we do not lead with it
Spent on programmes
94%
$23M of $25M spent

A high figure here is not straightforwardly good. The measure counts money spent on programmes against money spent running the organisation, so it rewards charities that under-invest in staff, systems and evaluation — and it can be moved by accounting choices rather than by doing more. The largest charity raters publicly abandoned it as a headline measure for exactly that reason. It is here because it is on the filing and people look for it, not because we think it tells you who to give to.

Employees
25
Volunteers
1,733
Total spending
$25M
Staff costs
$4M

No comparison shown. We list only 1 charity under this cause with a filing, which is too few to rank against meaningfully. A percentile drawn from a handful of organisations looks precise and means nothing.

Figures are as the organisation reported them to the IRS. We do not adjust, score or rate them, and we do not combine them into a single number — that would require deciding how much each one matters, which is your judgement to make, not ours.

Is this your organisation? If anything here is wrong, out of date, or you would rather not be listed at all, tell us and we will correct it or remove you. We do not require a reason.

Against every Family Services charity in the country

1,529 filed under IRS code P40 in 2025
From donations
100%
higher than 77% of them
median 92%
Spent on programmes
94%
higher than 74% of them
median 85%
Highest salary
$300K
higher than 97% of them
median $50K

A percentile here is a position among charities the IRS classifies the same way — it is not a score, and being lower is not automatically worse. A large organisation running its own veterinary hospitals will spend a different share on programmes than one that passes grants through, and both are doing their job.