Tulsa Garden Center Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731442318
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9185765155
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical, Horticultural, and Landscape Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,622
Expenses
$24,736
Assets
$585,560
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Judith Carter (President)

People named in this filing

  • Judith Carter (President)
  • Mike Blake (Secretary)
  • Michael Patton (Ex officio)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Located in the historic Snedden Mansion within Woodward Park, our mission is to provide a variety of horticultural and environmental educational opportunities for the community and to serve as horticultural headquarters for the Tulsa area. We offer lectures, classes, training, plant shows, and special events throughout the year which are predominantly free for our Members. Additionally, over 20 affiliated organizations such as the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club hold the majority of their meetings and events at the Tulsa Garden Center.

What it reported doing in 2018

Support of the Tulsa Garden Center

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 24
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 23.67; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -63.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -43.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.4% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.