Grant Park Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582449448
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4045210938
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Camps

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$945,651
Expenses
$1,316,021
Assets
$834,610
Liabilities
$159,585

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michelle Blackmon (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michelle Blackmon (Executive Director): $104,000 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 Grant Park Conservancy is committed to the restoration, beautification and maintenance of historic Grant Park.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Grant Park Conservancy works to create a world-class park by raising funds to execute specific capital improvements and ecological projects restoring and improving the Park's natural health and built enviroment. Projects include the restoration of historic structures, such as the 1927 Millege Fountain, the circa 1885 Lion Bridge and the 1896 Erskine Fountain. Other improvement projects that enchance both the beauty and functionality of the Park are the creation of welcoming gathering spaces with pedestrian plazas, picnic areas and play spaces. Ecological projects include the design, installation and maintenance of gardens at renovated sites including a rain garden at the Lion Bridge and a daffodil project garden at the Erskine Fountain.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -39.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 21 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $671K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.