Direct Gardening Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381799290
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Lagrange, GA, USA
Phone
7068459085
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$99,126
Expenses
$139,712
Assets
$158,318
Liabilities
$4,111

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEN OAKES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • POLLY WELCH (PAST PRESIDE)
  • KEN OAKES (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURI LANGE (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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the general interests of the mail order gardening business. To bring about a closer understanding and a spirit of mutual cooperation amongst the direct gardening association members. To protect members against unfair and discriminatory legislation at both the state and national level. To warn and protect members against unfair business practices.

What it reported doing in 2017

The association conducts surveys and research to provide members with opportunities to meausre performance and customer service satisfaction.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -40.9%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.