Homeless Garden Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 770475165
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Santa Cruz, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8314263609
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,859,647
- Expenses
- $2,099,128
- Assets
- $4,068,516
- Liabilities
- $233,176
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brendan Miele (Vice President)
- Ron Slack (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Darrie Ganzhorn (Executive Dir.): $118,960 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 provide transitional employment/training of people experiencing homelessness.
What it reported doing in 2024
Homeless Garden Project (HGP) provides job training, transitional employment and support services to people who are experiencing homelessness. HGP also offers educational and volunteer opportunities to the broader community. The programs take place in an organic farm and in related enterprises.In 2024, the Organization provided 21,827 hours of paid job training. Ninety three percent of program graduates transitioned into stable jobs or income, and 93% transitioned into stable housing. The organization provided 465.5 hours of social work to program participants and addressed over 300 barriers to employment including: Support with financial planning and stability, opening bank accounts and assistance with budgeting, support with technology access, assistance with state and federal benefits enrollment and referral to legal support. The Organization also maintains a retail store which sells a variety of items handmade by volunteers and program trainees. From the broader community 1,314 people served as volunteers, contributing 8,707 hours. In addition, the Organization distributed 13,831 pounds of organic produce to low-income community members through their Feed 2 Birds program.
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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.4%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 55.1%; rating input score 55
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.4% of revenue deployed · 55.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.