Quail Valley Garden Club Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 760052813
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Missouri City, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2817320102
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Garden Club, Horticultural Program
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $51,450
- Expenses
- $45,639
- Assets
- $64,320
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sandy Cackowski (President)
- Ann Gross (First Vice President - Programs)
- Deborah Douglas (Second Vice President - Membership)
People named in this filing
- Sandy Cackowski (President)
- Ann Gross (First Vice President - Programs)
- Deborah Douglas (Second Vice President - Membership)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Quail Valley Garden Club's objectives are to share knowledge or horticulture and related subjects, to promote fellowship among members, to enhance civic beautification, to support education within our community and to work for the conservation of natural resources. These include a scholarship program for college bound students in our neighborhood and civic and community beautification programs. Our membership is open to all which includes a small membership fee each year.
What it reported doing in 2024
Educational speakers from local horticulture extension centers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 75% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.7%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 1
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.7% of revenue deployed · 0.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $354 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.