American Conifer Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222469164
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6513178040
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Reported finances

Revenue
$257,112
Expenses
$243,089
Assets
$749,923
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF HARVEY (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH HARDWICK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH MERRIAM (REGIONAL PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE REIMERT (REGIONAL PRESIDENT)
  • PHILLIP MCCORMICK (REGIONAL PRESIDENT)
  • VINCENT GRASSO (REGIONAL PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JEFF HARVEY (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH HARDWICK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER HARVEY (SECRETARY)

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

The purpose of the american conifer society is to educate the public about conifers, including their landscape use, conservation, propagation and development.

What it reported doing in 2024

Collectors' conifer of the year plant sales. Each year, 4-5 different conifer cultivars are selected for rarity, unique desirable traits, importance for conservation, or garden utility. Those plants are offered for sale to members so they can experience unusual plants that would not otherwise be easily available. This program encourages appreciation and learning about the many genera, species, and cultivars of conifers for the members and all that visit their gardens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 36%; rating input score 36; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.08; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.4% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $200K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 36/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.