Shaker Lakes Garden Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
346570143
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Cleveland Heights, OH, USA
Phone
2166502072
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$88,944
Expenses
$65,147
Assets
$212,002
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY MILLER (PRESIDENT)
  • BETH BOLES (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNE FITZGERALD (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PETRA MORAN (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AMY MILLER (PRESIDENT)
  • BETH BOLES (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNE FITZGERALD (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)

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

To educate and stimulate the interest of its members and the public in matters related to environmental protection, conservation, horticulture, gardening and related subjects.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dues paid to national organization (the garden club of america in which shaker lakes garden club is a member) that furthers the national organization's exempt purpose of stimulating the knowledge and love of gardening; sharing the advantages of assoication by means of open meetings, conferences, correspondence, and publications; restoring, improving, and protecting the quality of the environment through programs and action in the field of conservation, civic improvements, and education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.8%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.25; rating input score 76; 76th 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: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.