The Mynelle Gardens Botanical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
640905027
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Flowood, MS, USA
Phone
6019925596
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,877
Expenses
$8,397
Assets
$15,116
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON PHILLIPS (PRESIDENT)
  • JONELLE G PRIMOS (VICE-PRESIDENT/TREASURER)

People named in this filing

  • DON PHILLIPS (PRESIDENT)
  • JONELLE G PRIMOS (VICE-PRESIDENT/TREASURER)
  • MARY WEEKS (DIRECTOR)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is to render support and assistance to the management and staff of mynelle gardens; to restore the gardens to the level of excellence originally visualized by mynelle; to educate children and adults in the natural beauty of plants and their cultivation; to improve the quality of the social and cultural environment of the city through horticultural activities; to develop programs at mynelle gardens with an educational purpose and to generate financial support for the gardens, activities and development.

What it reported doing in 2014

Expenditures to restore the gardens to a level of excellence

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.7%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 35.3%; rating input score 35

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -72.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -51% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.7% of revenue deployed · 35.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • 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 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.