The Rivanna Garden Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521232429
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Charlottesville, VA, USA
Phone
2144153834
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,103
Expenses
$22,695
Assets
$132,986
Liabilities
$1,641

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA MORIN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LISA MORIN (PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN MARTIN (1ST VICE PRE)
  • JENNIFER SMITH (2ND VICE PRE)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

(a) generally, to stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening; to promote gardening among amateurs; to share horticultural knowledge by means of meetings, demonstrations, lectures, conferences, correspondence and publications; (b) to restore, improve and protect the quality of the environment through educational programs and action to protect our native trees, wildflowers and birds; to encourage conservation of natural resources; to promote civic planting; to encourage roadside beautification; and to aid in the restoration and preservation of historic gardens in Virginia; and. (c) to do all things necessary and proper to accomplish the educational and charitable purposes stated herein and permitted by law to non-stock organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

The club donates funds, labor and expertise to civic improvement projects paid from the funds of the club. The club conducts activities designed to promote an interest in gardening.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 68

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.8%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.86; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.6% of revenue deployed · 67.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.