Carmel Clay Parks Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351762153
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Carmel, IN, USA
Phone
3178468885
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$65,665
Expenses
$33,497
Assets
$46,650

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Westermeier (President)
  • Beth Meyers (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Mark Westermeier (President)
  • Beth Meyers (Vice President)
  • Leah Kareti (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Carmel Clay Parks Foundation is dedicated to supporting the growth and enrichment of Carmel Clay Parks & Recreation by funding projects and initiatives not covered by taxpayer dollars. Our mission is to enrich the recreational and cultural experiences of our community, ensuring theres something for everyone to enjoy. Together we can create a lasting legacy of vibrant, well-maintained parks and greenways that will benefit the community for generations to come.

What it reported doing in 2025

Carmel Clay Parks Foundation is dedicated to supporting the growth and enrichment of Carmel Clay Parks & Recreation by funding projects and initiatives not covered by taxpayer dollars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.2%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.2% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $32K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.