Center for Green Space Design

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 300133570
IRS 990-EZ coverage: 2011–2012
Forms available: Form 990 2010, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location: Park City, UT, USA
Phone: 4352329792
Rating: 83
Verdict: STRONG
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Visual Arts Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $8,319
Expenses: $28,627
Assets: $0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission green space design is to provide an open forum for the discussion of open space preservation issues. Because we understand that a broad range of individuals with varied interests ultimately determines a community's open space future, we seek to bring these individuals together to discuss, debate, and arrive at solutions that will ensure open space preservation for community residents while accommodating the inevitable growth.

What it reported doing in 2012

This year, the initiative efforts included significant work with the wasatch front regional council projects. Efforts included developing a five county regional plan with supporting documents, reports and maps along with holding informative meetings, educational sessions, information gathering efforts and workshops with regional leaders and committees. The organization also conducted educational outreach efforts in southern Utah.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 100
Transparency & Controls: 82
Sustainability: 2
Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

Operating margin: -244.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

Program expense growth: -87.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: -62.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
Governance: Filed governance answers
Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
Schedules: 3 filed schedules
Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
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: Operating margin scored 4/100.
High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.