Carnation Marigold E Rose Circle Street Maintenance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
333702493
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
4806886170
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood, Block Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$331,183
Expenses
$322,879
Assets
$8,304
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert Murphy (President)
  • Faye Widenmann (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Robert Murphy (President)
  • Faye Widenmann (Vice-President)
  • Susan Freeman (Secretary)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Pave and maintain three ungated city streets that city wont maintain because not dedicated to the city until and unless extensive renovation including sidewalks and widening streets. The streets were broken and unsafe used by people in adjacent communities to access arterial streets as well as by homeowners. Neighbors contributed funds for paving by a licensed contractor. All work by corporate officers was voluntary not compensated. Funds not used for initial paving will be used for ongoing maintenance including 2026 seal-coating of street paving.

What it reported doing in 2025

Neighbors contributed 331,783 during 2025 to pay for street maintenance. The corporation engaged a licensed contractor and worked with that company to excavate and remove broken asphalt grade the base install new asphalt and install concrete collars around sewer manholes and water valves on N. Marigold Drive E. Carnation Circle and E. Rose Circle Drive in Phoenix AZ 85018. The total cost paid to the contractor was 321,168. The year-end balance plus 2026 contributions will be used for seal-coating the streets in 2026 with any remaining funds retained for future maintenance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $321K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $321K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.