Water Conservation Garden Authority

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330639414
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
El Cajon, CA, USA
Phone
6196447591
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$915,617
Expenses
$594,162
Assets
$1,192,850
Liabilities
$59,839

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN COATES HEDBERG (President)
  • JOSE LOPEZ (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DR LYNN NEAULT (Secretary)
  • KATHLEEN COATES HEDBERG (President)
  • JENNIFER BRYANT (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Supporting the water conservation garden in promoting water conservation in the southern California landscape through excellent programs and exhibits that educate and inspire the public.

What it reported doing in 2024

In April 2024, the Water Conservation Garden Authority terminated its operating agreement with the Friends of the Water Conservation Garden which had managed the garden for almost 14 years. Following the termination, the Authority assumed direct responsibility for operating the Water Conservation Garden. The Water Conservation Garden has nearly six acres of displays that showcase water conservation through a series of beautiful themed gardens, such as a native plant garden and a vegetable garden, as well as how-to displays such as mulch and irrigation exhibits. The Garden also features a native butterfly pavilion that is open spring and summer each year.The Water Conservation Garden is composed of a series of demonstration garden spaces that showcase drought-tolerant plants from around the world and the many different garden styles possible with this expansive plant palette.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.2%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 60.7%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 35.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.2% of revenue deployed · 60.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $361K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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 40/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.