Redlands Horticultural & Improvement Soc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330632491
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Redlands, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,814
Expenses
$17,834
Assets
$102,482
Liabilities
$730

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS SEDMACK (President)

People named in this filing

  • CHRIS SEDMACK (President)
  • MARSHA SINKOVICH (FIRST VICE PRES)
  • LINDA BROOKS (SECOND VP)

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

Increase and enhance the beauty of the community and through it's educational activity, encourage the love and practice of horticulture among it's citizens, both adults and children.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of the society shall be to increase and enhance the beauty of the community and through its educational activity, encourage the love and practice of horticulture among its citizens, both adults and children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.75; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.