Pittsburgh Botanic Garden

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251648405
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4124444464
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,772,237
Expenses
$4,180,883
Assets
$19,895,506
Liabilities
$1,075,038

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Keith Kaiser (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Keith Kaiser (Executive Director): $136,078 total reported compensation
  • Robert Mermelstein (Chief Financial Officer): $93,513 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pittsburgh Botanic Garden inspires people to value plants, garden design and the natural world by cultivating plant collections of the Allegheny Plateau and temperate regions, creating display gardens, conducting educational programs and conserving the environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Horticulture: Pittsburgh Botanic Garden inspires people to value plants, garden design and the natural world by cultivating plant collections of the Allegheny Plateau and temperate regions, creating display gardens, conducting educational programs and conserving the environment. The Garden is a qualified caretaker of 460 acres of southwest Pennsylvania's land and water. Dedicated staff and volunteers create and maintain this space as a habitat for native flora and fauna. ** See Continuation on Schedule O **In addition to ongoing conservation efforts such as mitigating acid mine drainage and reforestation projects, the Garden provides 65 acres of cultivated gardens and woodlands for the public to connect to plants. Through this innate experience: young minds are engaged, gardeners are inspired, and all visitors find a sense of calm.Central to the story of Pittsburgh Botanic Garden is the poor condition of the site upon which it is being built. Left in a deplorable state following coal extraction throughout the first half of the 20th Century, the land was unfit for most uses and even dangerous in spots. Further damage was caused by flooding of the mines beneath the surface in 2004, which exposed a severe acid mine drainage problem. The land and water are being reclaimed and repaired. Abandoned mine features, invasive species and poor site conditions are being replaced by educational gardens, reconstructed woodlands, and lovely views. The Garden is providing long-term benefits, including carbon capture, superior soil conservation and lasting habitat improvement.A few conservation highlights since beginning its land and water reclamation efforts in 2014: - In 2025, Pittsburgh Botanic Garden conducted the first prescribed burn in Allegheny County. This was part of the Garden's integrated approach to either weakening or ultimately eliminating the presence of Lespedeza cuneata, a non-native plant that negatively influences local biodiversity. - Participates in the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources' Wild Plant Sanctuary Program. - 15,000 native saplings were planted to reforest an abandoned mine site. The Garden collaborated with Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, United States Office of Surface Mining and Plant Five for Life. - With no chemical treatments or energy inputs, and minimal maintenance, water once considered 'dead' now supports a healthy aquatic ecosystem. The Garden operates three passive, water filter systems which neutralize more than 25 million gallons of acid mine discharge each year, prior to it entering the region's watershed and then the Ohio River. - The first innovative filter system to be installed creates the Garden's Lotus Pond, a focal point of the Japanese Garden. The Garden was recognized for this system as the recipient of the 2014 Pennsylvania Governor's Award for Environmental Excellence. - The Garden's work in mitigating acid mine drainage is recognized by the U.S. Office of Surface Mining as a national model and has since been duplicated elsewhere.

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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd 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: 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: -10.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.76; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 35 of 35 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $136K · 41 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $262K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.