The Garden for All

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992527575
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
New Albany, OH, USA
Phone
6148558267
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$512,067
Expenses
$262,367
Assets
$410,291
Liabilities
$9,805

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE DUFFY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARCI LEVEILLEE (EXECUTIVE DI): $55,769 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fighting hunger: we grow high-quality produce using organic methods and provide all of it to local food pantries. We deliver as much nutritious food as we can, aiming to meet the needs of the pantry patrons. Growing community: - we provide opportunities for people to come together to be in relationship with the earth and with one another - we provide opportunities for people to invest in the larger community and in the health of other people. - we provide opportunities for fun in the garden space - we provide education on gardening and on sustainability

What it reported doing in 2025

The garden for all grows thousands of pounds of fresh, organic produce and flowers at a one-third acre garden and a three-acre farm for distribution to local food pantries with the help of hundreds of volunteers. In 2025, with the help of about 300 volunteers, we grew and distributed 36,400 pounds of produce to 10 food pantries in central Ohio. We also host educational and community programming, such as an annual children's garden party in the summer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.6%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48.8%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.56; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 100.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 90.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.6% of revenue deployed · 67.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $178K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.