Battle of Flowers Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922662038
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2108281096
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$249,452
Expenses
$76,450
Assets
$1,344,963
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HELEN EVERSBERG (President)

People named in this filing

  • KATHY JOHNSON (BOARD CHAIR)
  • HELEN EVERSBERG (President)
  • KATHI OPPENHEIMER (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 mission of the foundation is to sustain the work and purposes of the battle of flowers assoc. By encouraging knowledge and appreciation of Texas history and heritage, cultivating and providing opportunities for education, fostering patriotism and civic engagement, and conducting other charitable activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The battle of flowers foundation seeks to sustain the battle of flowers associations mission by raising funds for and working to benefit the peoples and communities of san antonio and Texas. Building on the battle of flowers associations longstanding relationships and partnerships with Texas students, their families and communities, the foundation will commit its resources to support excellence in education, to cultivate patriotic values, and to increase knowledge and appreciation of Texas' culture and history, by providing financial support and delivering branded programs that seek to:1) increase accessibility to resources, historic locations and experiences that teach and bring alive Texas history;2) provide higher education opportunities for students, especially those who have participated in the associations activities;3) provide training, resources and/or support to educators and educational institutions to recognize, implement and/or further, impactful educational programs, including those with special focus on Texas history and culture; and, potentially, to create a specialist teacher certification/recognition in Texas history.4) create opportunities and awards for student excellence in the arts, writing, and public speaking;5) promote literacy;6) encourage and recognize Texas and united states patriotism, good citizenship, and student and community leadership;7) honor and support our military and service members families;8) sustain the mission of the battle of flowers association.during the 2024-2025 fiscal year, the battle of flowers foundation provided funds to the saisd foundation in order to allow for approximately 1,100 students from title i schools to attend a field trip to austin, Texas to visit the bullock Texas state history museum. Additionally, the battle of flowers foundation provided funds to the remember the alamo foundation in order to allow for approximately 800 students to attend a field trip to the alamo to learn about its history. Both of these projects served to directly increase accessibility to resources, historic locations and experiences that teach and bring alive Texas history, which is a central tenet of the mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.5%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 73%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.4%; rating input score 89; 52nd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.59; rating input score 94; 94th 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: 135.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -85.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.5% of revenue deployed · 73% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $51K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.