Philadelphia Orchard Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261075823
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2157241247
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,574,688
Expenses
$829,097
Assets
$1,418,932
Liabilities
$77,987

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marci Green (President)
  • Jena Harris (Vice President)
  • Kim Jordan (Co-Executive Director)
  • Phil Forsyth (Co-Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Phil Forsyth (Co-Executive Director): $78,449 total reported compensation
  • Kim Jordan (Co-Executive Director): $76,691 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the philadelphia orchard project is to support community orchards in the city of philadelphia. Existing programs include planting and maintaining orchards in collaboration with community groups and providing educational opportunities in orchard care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.7%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st 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: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.3%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.7% of revenue deployed · 74.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $614K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 28 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.