Coccoloba Chapter Florida Native Plant Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651120035
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Estero, FL, USA
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical, Horticultural, and Landscape Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,065
Expenses
$8,560
Assets
$186,851
Liabilities
$11

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marlene Rodak (President)
  • Paula Reiss (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Marlene Rodak (President)
  • Paula Reiss (Vice President)
  • Jeanette Atkinson (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the preservation conservation and restoration of native plants and native plant communities of Florida.

What it reported doing in 2025

Educating the public on native plants with hands-on volunteer opportunities native plant sales tours classes internships and more. This is done by actively managing River Oaks Preserve for the Village of Estero with a native plant nursery tours etc. The Preserve is open to the public and hosts many FGCU students. Other events include off-site classes pop-up plant sales etc. Preserve volunteers logged 4272.5 hours valued at $135,053.73 this fiscal year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.8%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 85%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.83; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.