Friends of Macarthur Beach State Park Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
650196497
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
North Palm Beach, FL, USA
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$921,277
Expenses
$779,661
Assets
$1,160,790
Liabilities
$26,964

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • W MASON (President)
  • ADAM JONES (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • W MASON (President)
  • PETER JORDAN (Treasurer)
  • ADAM JONES (Vice President)

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

Organization's mission is the support of macarthur state park and its functions. Our mission is to generate supplemental resources to preserve, restore, and interpret the natural and cultural assets of the park for present and fututre gererations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided for environmental education for over 4000 palm beach county students, summer science camps for children ages 6 to 17, college intern students from across the u.s. Provided funding for special events including nature fest, international coastal clean-up, macarthur under moonlight concerts, and teacher workshops. Provide supplies and equipment, volunteer appreciation event.

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 89% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 61%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 61% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $476K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.