Olbrich Botanical Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391357247
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082464586
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,667,076
Expenses
$3,419,089
Assets
$5,987,239
Liabilities
$744,453

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALNISA ALLGOOD (PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN GOODWIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PHILIP BRADBURY (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • TANYA ZASTROW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TANYA ZASTROW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $124,442 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Olbrich botanical gardens enriches lives and inspires people to live in harmony with the natural world. Olbrich botanical gardens is dedicated to the creation, conservation, and interpretation of gardens and plant collections hardy to the american midwest or native to the world's tropical forests for study, enjoyment, and public benefit. The public-private partnership of olbrich botanical society and the city of madison parks division makes the mission possible.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs and exhibitions: olbrich offers a number of free and low-cost programs to members and the general public that have educational components relating to the plant and garden collections. Programming at olbrich botanical gardens is generally mission-related, are traditional activities held within the gardens, and provide educational opportunities for families or pure enjoyment within the gardens for all audiences.

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 80% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

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: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.75; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.