Cedar Rapids Parks Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811169736
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$154,875
Expenses
$75,473
Assets
$237,844

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dina Haveric (President)
  • Jenny Skogman (Immediate Past President)
  • Laurie Worden (Executive Director)
  • Joe Worden (2nd Vice President)
  • Claire Sagers (Vice President)
  • Melanie Harms (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Dina Haveric (President)
  • Jenny Skogman (Immediate Past President)
  • Heather Visser (Director)

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

Creating enhancing and sustaining innovative parks and recreation opportunities in Cedar Rapids for all community members

What it reported doing in 2025

Hughes Park: $7,500 to help fund a new ice rink and $5,400 to help move rocks for a new Veterans display

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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.1%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 42.3%; rating input score 42

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.3%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.15; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.1% of revenue deployed · 42.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $32K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.