Friends of the Palo Alto Parks
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 562424518
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Palo Alto, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3035949675
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parks and Playgrounds
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $92,702
- Expenses
- $28,699
- Assets
- $212,640
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jennifer Smith (President)
- David Moss (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Jennifer Smith (President)
- David Moss (Vice President)
- Juanita Salisbury (Secretary)
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
Friends of the Palo Alto Parks works with the city of Palo Alto, private groups, other nonprofits, and citizen organizations to preserve, maintain, and beautify Palo Alto's parks and open spaces.
What it reported doing in 2025
General Fund: Donations to the Friends of the Palo Alto Parks General Fund allow the Board of Directors the flexibility to act quickly to allocate money to a project most in need. Some money from this fund is also used for expenses that can't be avoided, such as the annual corporation fees paid to the state to continue as a non-profit corporation. If a donation is made, and a project is not specified, the money goes into the General Fund. In 2025 the general fund received significant donations and the Board of Directors is working to utilize these donations to increase our contributions to the improvement of the Palo Alto parks and open spaces in 2026 and beyond for the entire Palo Alto community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.9%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 69%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.41; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33.9% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $28K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.