Gardopia Gardens

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474927209
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2018
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2104786454
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical, Horticultural, and Landscape Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,612,349
Expenses
$1,074,323
Assets
$911,545
Liabilities
$116,909

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Stephen Lucke (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephen Lucke (Chief Executive Officer): $79,595 total reported compensation
  • Dominic Dominguez (Chief Operating Officer): $76,792 total reported compensation
  • Sherry Lim (Chief Learning Officer): $73,792 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To grow healthy communities through garden-based learning.

What it reported doing in 2024

Gardopia Gardens Garden-Based Learning Program is our largest initiative, delivering hands-on gardening, nutrition, sustainability, and environmental education to students across San Antonio. During the most recent fiscal period, this program generated $591,805.60 in revenue, supporting in-school and out-of-school programming at over 60 educational sites. During this reporting period, Gardopia Gardens provided 1,427 instructional classes, serving 5,184 unduplicated youth (28,575 duplicated youth engagements). Programming supported 548 active learning gardens and 36 farm beds, expanding access to outdoor classrooms and experiential STEM, nutrition, and climate education across multiple school districts.

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 filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 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: 33.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.