Mount Pisgah Arboretum

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237345974
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eugene, OR, USA
Phone
5417473817
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$902,233
Expenses
$1,036,834
Assets
$2,443,394
Liabilities
$133,444

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SALLY STENDER KESEY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRAD VAN APPEL (EXECUTIVE DI): $57,373 total reported compensation
  • ILANA JAKUBOWSKI (EXECUTIVE DI): $46,351 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to engage people with nature through interactive learning and stewardship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mount pisgah arboretum is a 209-acre natural area where visitors explore southern willamette valley ecology on our seven miles of family-friendly trails. Located within a 2,200-acre lane county park, we host 400,000 yearly visits. We are supported by 2,100 members, and engage hundreds of volunteers. The arboretum has invested over a million dollars to build infrastructure within the park. We constructed and maintain the park's main parking lot, its primary public restrooms, and potable water system. In 2005 we opened the beautiful white oak pavilion, which now helps support our nature education programs by serving as a venue for weddings, memorials, and other community events.

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 97% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 64.3%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.36; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.3% of revenue deployed · 64.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $666K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $57K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.