The Garden Club of St Louis

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237421573
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3147052411
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,209
Expenses
$11,484
Assets
$163,622
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANET HORLACHER (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • CARRIE POLK (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • DEDE FRATT (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT - PROGRAMS)
  • PEGGY DOZIER (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT - PROGRAMS)
  • WENDY WOLFSBERGER (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT - PROGRAMS)
  • LAUREN BROWN (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT - INVITATIONS)

People named in this filing

  • JANET HORLACHER (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • CARRIE POLK (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • DEDE FRATT (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT - PROGRAMS)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Simulate the knowledge and love of gardening

What it reported doing in 2025

Workshops and lectures on gardening, the environment, conservation, and support for various civic projects

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 46.1%; rating input score 46

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -120.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.25; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 46.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.