Japanese Friendship Garden of Phoenix Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201978899
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6022748700
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Cultural, Ethnic Awareness
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,354,476
- Expenses
- $1,827,216
- Assets
- $2,576,207
- Liabilities
- $126,830
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ben Schrepf (Executive Director)
- Kiyoko Goldhardt (President)
- Sam Lowry (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Ben Schrepf (Executive Director): $95,637 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Japanese Friendship Garden of Phoenix provides a peaceful and beautiful green space in the city center and promotes Japanese arts and culture through hands on workshops, cultural events, and wellness activities. The garden regularly engages with the local community and brings together craftsmen locally and from Japan to foster cultural exchange. Continued on Schedule O.
What it reported doing in 2024
The garden offered educational hands-on workshops in traditional Japanese arts, including tea ceremony, ikebana, origami, calligraphy, and bonsai, as well as wellness activities like moon meditation, martial arts, and forest bathing meditations. A total of 170 workshops were held, serving approximately 800 participants. Participant feedback indicated high satisfaction and strong educational outcomes. Workshops provided both community enrichment and revenue through registration fees.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.3%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
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: 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 22.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.3% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.