Dubuque County Gardeners Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421550248
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Asbury, IA, USA
Phone
8632061654
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,203
Expenses
$4,302
Assets
$15,490
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bruce Rothenberger (President)
  • Cheryl Sheldon (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Bruce Rothenberger (President)
  • Cheryl Sheldon (Vice President)
  • Rhonda Hudgins (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Supporting the Iowa State University Dubuque County Extension and Outreach Master Gardener Program with horticultural information delivered to the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Co-sponsorship of a Saturday educational garden tour, along with a pre-tour for garden site hosts and volunteers. Donations and ticket sales were split with the supported organization according to a Memorandum of Understanding. Five homes were on the tour, with over 350 attendees. Number of volunteers supporting the regular educational event included 25 Master Gardeners who coordinated, facilitated, answered questions, and/or taught during the day. A raffle was included, with a donated garden bench, so that a donation/grant could be made to a partner - the Conservation Department of the National Mississippi River Museum and Aquarium.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 18
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.5%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 19.9%; rating input score 20

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.6; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.5% of revenue deployed · 19.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $857 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 16/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.