My Mothers Community Garden Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872386678
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Phone
3096968426
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,031
Expenses
$11,939
Assets
$133
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERNEST STARKS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHERYLL BOSWELL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ERNEST STARKS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHARLA FLEMMING (TREASURER)
  • SHARON KRAMER (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The garden is located in the lowest economic section we will provide education and continue give fresh produce to more than 200 families

What it reported doing in 2025

Social and Emotional support by using YOGA in the Garden which is instrumental in teaching participants how to manage their emotions and recognize their feelings along with raising their self-awareness. Our goal is to continue to cultivate young leaders into being responsible; classes on seed to table concepts with teaching participants how to grow and eat healthy foods

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -41.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.