Vallarta Botanical Gardens

Legal name: Friends of Vallarta Botanical Gardens AC

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331156194
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Mill Valley, CA, US
Phone
+52 322 223 6182
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$531,125
Expenses
$467,199
Assets
$263,017
Liabilities
$59,724

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jesus Reyes (President)
  • Robert Price (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jesus Reyes (President)
  • Robert Price (Vice President)
  • Meredith Rosenberg (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To conserve and celebrate the unique plant biodiversity of western Mexico.

What it reported doing in 2025

Friends of Vallarta Botanical Gardens, A.C. is a U.S. public charity that supports the charitable, educational, scientific, and conservation mission of Vallarta Botanical Gardens through fundraising, donor stewardship, and grantmaking. During 2025, Friends raised charitable contributions from U.S. donors and awarded purpose-restricted grants to support charitable programs, conservation initiatives, environmental education, accessibility, and capital improvements at Vallarta Botanical Gardens. Grant funding supported the initial phase of an emergency backup generator project to improve operational resilience and visitor safety during power outages, the acquisition of an accessible golf cart to improve access for visitors with mobility limitations, and employee recognition initiatives that furthered the Gardens' charitable mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 20th 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: 12%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $432K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.