The Peterson Garden Project Inc Nfp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272417699
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
2193133219
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$367,645
Expenses
$380,221
Assets
$50,337
Liabilities
$81,703

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LA MANDA JOY MINIKEL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANTHONY ABRUSCATO (DIRECTOR)
  • REBECCA GERCHESON (DIRECTOR)
  • SALLY GREGORY (TREASURER)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Peterson garden project (the organization) (pgp) is an Illinois not-for- profit community volunteer organization committed to working with community members throughout the chicago area to create and sustain food-producing urban gardens, and increase community building in neighborhoods. The organization was formed in 2010. The resources provided by the pgp for community gardens include securing land, design, and construction of gardens, leadership, education as well as best practices, outreach and maintenance. Activity approximates 8 gardens, 1039 plots, 800 volunteers and 3636 gardeners.

What it reported doing in 2015

Community gardens program: pgp works with communities to educate and inspire gardeners to gain control of their food supply, grow their own produce organically and make urban gardening the norm, rather than the exception. With four pop up victory gardens, two demo gardens, a school garden and a workplace garden at the field museum, pgp established 578 garden plots; donated 1000 pounds of produce via our grow2give program where 5% of the beds at each garden is designated for this program; partnered with the field museum, with funds provided in part by community and economic development association of cook country to establish the edible treasures garden, a workplace community vegetable garden at the field museum tasked with introducing visitors to the value and diversity of heirloom seeds. Pgp has served over 2000 gardenrs with the help of more than 400 volunteers.

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 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.62; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 34.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $326K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.