Naples Botanical Garden Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
650511429
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Naples, FL, USA
Phone
2396437275
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,443,088
Expenses
$16,976,682
Assets
$76,963,870
Liabilities
$9,014,226

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONNA M MCGINNIS (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA M MCGINNIS (PRESIDENT/CE): $301,770 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA W NICKRENT (VP/CHIEF OF): $208,749 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN GALLIGAN (VP OF HORTIC): $175,492 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See program service accomplishment.pdf

What it reported doing in 2024

Naples botanical garden creates beautiful displays highlighting rare and valuable scientific specimens, creating an environment rich with opportunities to learn. It provides formal and informal environmental education efforts for all ages, abilities and backgrounds with a goal of measurable behavior change. The entire campus is used as an outdoor classroom. Audiences include citizens, tourists, schools, community organizations, local governments, and professionals in the fields of stormwater management, land management, landscape architecture, golf course management, and homeowners' association management. Naples botanical garden develops plant-based environmental solutions for the most threatened ecosystems in Florida and the tropical world. The living collection continues to grow with a focus on plan diversity, genetic diversity, known provenance (especially wild provenance), conservation status, and those that are or could be food sources. Priorities in Florida include developing research-based solutions for rebuilding resilient urban forests, strenghtening beaches and landscaping for clean water.

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 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.53; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $302K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.