Edgerton Park Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
060881839
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Hamden, CT, USA
Phone
2036249377
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical, Horticultural, and Landscape Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$146,994
Expenses
$150,373
Assets
$511,159
Liabilities
$800

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GARY HELLER (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL KRAUSS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANGIE HURLBUT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY MACGREGOR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DANIELLE WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SEAN DUFFY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • DOUGLAS RHOADS (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ANDREW DRABKIN (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To encourage and support all efforts and activities concerned with the preservation, restoration and enhancement of edgerton park, to sponsor horticultural education and programming, and to promote the park as a place for use and enjoyment of the general park.

What it reported doing in 2024

The edgerton park conservancy collaborates effectively with surrounding communities and jurisdictions (in particular, the city of new haven) to ensure that edgerton park thrives as a resource for all, and flourishes as an example of its original landscape aesthetic while adapting to environmental and ecological challenges. The epc is itself an open and inclusive organization that pursues its vision by:- restoring and preserving the park's historical structures and landscape;- offering environmental enrichment opportunities for greater new haven area schools;- sponsoring and organizing public exhibitions, forums and lectures;- maintaining and staffing a horticultural library and park-specific archives;- offering community garden sites, the carriage house, and sections of the greenhouses to the public; and- providing indoor and outdoor space for cultural events produced by other not-for-profit groups.

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 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.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 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: -2.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.4; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $137K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.