Georgetown Scott County Friends of the Parks Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813494778
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Georgetown, KY, USA
Phone
5025423081
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,769
Expenses
$10,836
Assets
$60,843

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lisa Cook (President, Dir.)

People named in this filing

  • Lisa Cook (President, Dir.)
  • Tia Chancellor (VP, Dir.)
  • Patti Parker (Director)

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

Our goal is to promote parks and recreation opportunities in Scott County through donations, solicitations, bequests, and fundraising.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our accomplishments for 2025 include: a. New trash bins and benches to Peninsula Parkb. New adjustable basketball goals for Boston Community Parkc. Established park clean up events for more volunteer involvement/community engagement in support of our mission.The organization received a one-time unusual grant in size ($50,000) from a donor who has no relationship with the organization. The organization does not expect to receive another such donation from the donor.

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 98% 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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.3%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84

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: 79.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.61; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.3% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.