Pennsylvania Horticultural Society

Legal name: The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231352265
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
215-988-8800
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,908,442
Expenses
$38,285,493
Assets
$74,418,121
Liabilities
$11,479,164

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW P RADER (PRESIDENT)
  • TAMELA VIEIRA (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT & TREASURER)
  • SETH PEARSOLL (CREATIVE DIRECTOR & VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW P RADER (PRESIDENT): $487,755 total reported compensation
  • TAMELA VIEIRA (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT & TREASURER): $297,368 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT FEINBERG (CHIEF MARKETING & COMMN. OFFICER): $231,732 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

PHS uses horticulture to advance the health and well-being of the Greater Philadelphia region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Phs's educational programs provide horticultural information and training to members, volunteers and other constituents in the philadelphia region through workshops, lectures, tours, events and publications. It includes one of the largest horticultural libraries in the country with nearly 15,000 volumes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 10 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $28.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $488K · 35 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.