Cactus and Succulent Society of America
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 956140611
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Pasadena, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6027728282
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Garden Club, Horticultural Program
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $739,689
- Expenses
- $546,548
- Assets
- $1,385,784
- Liabilities
- $245
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jeff Pavlat (Past President)
- Rod Haenni (President)
- Irwin LIGHTSTONE (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Jeff Pavlat (Past President)
- Rod Haenni (President)
- ROXIE ESTERLE (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The ccsa strives to promote the appreciation, knowledge & conservation of cactus & succulents through publications, conventions, shows, seed banks and research grants.
What it reported doing in 2025
CSSA has a Research Grants Program that provides small facilitation grants in support of research on succulent plants. Typical awards range up to $1200 - 3000 and occassionaly more. The Research Grants Program is administered by the CSSA Research Committee, which is overseen by the CSSA Board of Directors. The Research Grants Program is funded entirely from donations made to CSSA and dedicated to this program. Donors include individuals, organizations, and businesses. Substantial funding is derived from the Rare Plant Auction held at the CSSA Conventions and shows. During the year the Research Fund awarded a total of $11,670 through three grant awards. The Conservation Fund awarded a total of $15,152 through three separate awards.Because the membership of the Cactus and Succulent Society of America is composedprimarily of hobbyists, and because research funds are donated primarily by hobbyists, many of the grants funded by the Society are for research that increases the level of knowledge and understanding of the members about succulent plants. General types of research supported by the CSSA include, but are not limited to, studies to discover new species or forms; of ecological associations; to increase knowledge of taxonomy, nomenclature, and biogeography; relating to all aspects of cultivation, artificial propagation and mass production; relating to conservation of threatened or endangered species; of basic biology, such as morphology and physiology, especially as these relate to the needs and interests of hobbyists.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 73
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 28th 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.1%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.54; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $488K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.