City Parks Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800015566
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024178258
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,720,878
Expenses
$1,643,712
Assets
$790,971
Liabilities
$100,513

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLEGRA HAPPY HAYNES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MITCHELL SILVER (PRESIDENT)
  • CATHERINE NAGEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE NAGEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $191,485 total reported compensation
  • GIDEON BERGER (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $128,696 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the organization is to educate and elevate a diverse constituency to leverage the power of parks in shaping equitable, resilient, and thriving cities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy: disseminated information about the outdoor recreation legacy partnership grant program; worked with the mayors for parks coalition to raise awareness of park funding needs; supported members in their local advocacy to drive greater investment in park funding.research: completed parks and technology research initiative; continued parks and green stormwater research initiative.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.3%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 65.2%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.3% of revenue deployed · 65.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 33 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $236K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.