Lake Minnetonka Garden Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237010551
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Plymouth, MN, USA
Phone
7634739999
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,824
Expenses
$39,829
Assets
$409,459
Liabilities
$20,310

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BOBBIE DRESSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • MELISSA JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MIMI KEATING (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MITZI MAGID (BOARD MEMBER)
  • BOBBIE DRESSEN (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening, horticulture, the art of flower arranging, garden history and design and photography; to restore, improve, and protect the quality of the environment through action in the field of conservation; and to share the advantages of association by means of educational meetings and civic projects.

What it reported doing in 2024

The club earns charitable contributions from community donors and membership dues which are used to support their program services of (1) supporting and partnering with the Minnesota landscape arboretum (2) maintaining an educational garden to help members of the community see the various native plants that can be grown in Minnesota gardens, (3) issuing scholarships to students attending Minnesota institutions in the area of horticulture, environmental sciences or related fields, and (4) promoting environment awareness and the presentation of natural resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.6%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 72.7%; rating input score 73
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 54.1%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.28; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.6% of revenue deployed · 72.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 39/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.