Garden Club of Madison

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
066047068
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Madison, CT, USA
Phone
2036059814
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$73,109
Expenses
$50,542
Assets
$761,918
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUE KELLEY (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • MARLEEN PACELLI (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • BRENDA WILEY (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • SUE KELLEY (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • MARLEEN PACELLI (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • BRENDA WILEY (Vice President)

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 advance thefine art, knowledge, and enjoyment of gardening; to encourage the study of horticulture, landscape design, artistic design, ecology including coastal resilience, and the conservation of natural resources; to undertake civic beautification and conservation projects which enhance the community of madison and preserve its natural resources for future generations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The club provides monthly meetings including speakers program and workshops for members to learn about the topic of gardening, horticulture, floral design, landscape design and environmental issue. The club also engages in civic projects including planting and maintenance of community gardens and providing 60-65 floral arrangements for the madison meals on wheels program, and floral arrangements 7-8 times a year to madison senior center. The club also supports local youth education program and madison library.

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 89% 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 - 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.07; rating input score 75; 75th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.