Dekalb County Community Gardens

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463681206
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Dekalb, IL, USA
Phone
7792129543
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,532,738
Expenses
$1,727,007
Assets
$2,414,371
Liabilities
$39,994

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDY WANEK (PRESIDENT)
  • SEAN WALTERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HEATHER EDWARDS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HEATHER EDWARDS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $70,684 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build community while increasing food security through growing and providing ready access to fresh, nutritious local produce for dekalb county, Illinois residents.

What it reported doing in 2025

Dekalb county community gardens (dccg) strengthened the community by installing garden beds and growing of food at various garden locations. The garden locations included schools, community centers, city owned vacant lots, medical centers, businesses, churches, and the local ymca. Many volunteers worked in the gardens. The food grown was donated to local food pantries, community meal centers, senior citizen low income housing locations and childrens learning centers. The volunteers included at-risk youth who volunteered through a partnership between dccg and the local youth service bureau.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - 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 and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $224.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.8%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.7% of revenue deployed · 91.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.