Cullinan Park Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454477343
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Sugar Land, TX, USA
Phone
7135574049
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$141,012
Expenses
$555,492
Assets
$650,087
Liabilities
$710

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Keith Borgfeldt (President)
  • Monica Taylor (Vice President)
  • Beth Wolf (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Beth Wolf (Executive Director): $64,200 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 Cullinan Park Conservancy is committed to enhancing and protecting the natural beauty of the Cullinan Park for the use and enjoyment of wildlife and human visitors alike.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Conservancy is focused on several efforts that will help enhance the Park's status as, in the words of its major donor, Nina Cullinan, a "place of beauty and peacefulness in the city." Recent efforts include the completion of the design phase of our LEARN, EXPLORE, AND PLAY (LEAP) area at the Park. A donation was made to the City of Sugar Land (COSL) in December of 2024 for Construction design and bidding, as the COSL manages the Park and will manage the project. Fundraising efforts for this project are ongoing. The Conservancy works closely with the City of Sugar Land Parks Department to develop the Park's plans in accordance with the updated Master Plan (2024).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -293.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $495K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.