The Garden Club of Honolulu

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
996001533
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8083837485
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$131,121
Expenses
$80,522
Assets
$551,067
Liabilities
$41,862

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

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAN TUCKER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JAN TUCKER (PRESIDENT)
  • GAIL ATWATER (FIRST VICE P)
  • ELIZABETH LACY (SECOND VICE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the garden club of honolulu ("club") is to stimulate knowledge and love of gardening, horticulture, floral design and nature photography; and to promote and participate in the restoration, improvement and protection of the environment through programs and actions in conservation, civic improvement, and education.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. The club awards grants to Hawaii-based organizations to promote education and projects in conservation, gardening and civic enhancement or beautification in support of our mission. 2. Provided educational resources for members on horticulture, floral design, photography, conservation and environmental protection through speakers at general membership meetings, workshops and publications in conjunction with the garden club of america. 3. The club provides volunteers to help maintain public gardens and provides floral design classes for inmates at the womens community correctional center on oahu.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, 34% for grants, and 13% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.6%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 40.8%; rating input score 41; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.84; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.6% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 38 of 38 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $73K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 38 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.