Gardeners in Community Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752546504
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Richardson, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2146758473
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Garden Club, Horticultural Program
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,512
- Expenses
- $10,098
- Assets
- $866,497
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Donald Lambert (executive director)
People named in this filing
- Rebecca Smith (board member)
- Donald Lambert (executive director)
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
Gardeners in Community Development (GICD) educates and empowers people to work together on food production community gardens and urban agriculture projects to benefit themselves and their community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Food Production Support and Education: We share our experience so that others can manage successful food projects. Much of this is through an open invitation for educational tours, and learning opportunities through hands-on volunteering, and providing education at a farmers market. Many of our 150 or so volunteers each year have never gardened before, and are eager to learn about soil, how to plant and harvest, what to grow, benefits of mulching, how to water, etc. This opportunity to learn, out in a real garden, attracts youth, small children, an folks that are beginning gardeners. During the past year over 60 people attended these work and learn sessions. During this past year we have mentored a group managing a greenhouse, and helped groups involved in donating to food pantries. We continued a mini-farm where refugee gardeners can observe best practices in soil management, weed control, crop selection, harvesting, and other appropriate practices in on-going real time. At our farmers market booth weekly we share production information about locally grown food, and sell best varieties of herbs and vegetables transplants.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 77% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - 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 voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 41
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.3%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 58.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 85.81; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -25% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 41.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.