Ganna Walska Lotusland

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237082550
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Phone
8059693767
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,984,745
Expenses
$6,311,032
Assets
$59,009,571
Liabilities
$1,163,611

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL BIFANO (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID M JONES (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY F ROMANO (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARI MITCHEL (PRESIDENT)
  • CRYSTAL WYATT (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA ANDERSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA ANDERSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $272,532 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA SADEGHIAN (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $143,810 total reported compensation
  • ADAM FLINT (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $137,975 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 preserve and enhance the distinctive botanical gardens and estate of madame ganna walska. Lotusland educates and inspires visitors with its collections, sustainable horticulture practices, and plant conservation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Enhancing access and inclusion: north america's botanic gardens serve over 132 million people annually, demonstrating their immense value. However, some visitors find it challenging to access or afford a visit to lotusland given the $60 admission for adults. To address this, lotusland operates the museums for all program, with subsidized admissions for individuals receiving food assistance (snap benefits) by presenting their ebt card and a photo id.grant funds support educational programs and interns, sustainability programs and partnerships, and admissions and access. The garden also hosts at a discount community access days, nonprofit group tours and events, and leadership or staff meetings. These initiatives reflect lotusland's commitment to inclusivity and community engagement, ensuring that financial barriers do not prevent anyone from experiencing the wonders of the gardens. Grants enable us to provide access and tours to local nonprofit organizations, allowing individuals who might not otherwise experience lotusland to do so; accredited local museum or garden staff are hosted at no cost, fostering professional development and collaboration within the community. With private support, lotusland offers half-price tickets on community access days. These days include admissions for santa barbara county visitors to our outdoor gardens and collections, featuring pop-up programming that enriches the visitor experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.2%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 58.4%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.3%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.35; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.2% of revenue deployed · 58.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.